Jump to content
Bfg

That was a year that was..

Recommended Posts

BFG,

One vane lacks a tip.  That semi-circular piece on the hub is the balancer. so I'd move it around to the same side as the missing tip, but it may not be sufficient.   Make a copy in a thicker gauge of sheet?

JOhn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My best guess from the damaged bearing is corrosion from acidic products, that can form is the engine is left for a long time without running.

Waldi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And a number of those flakes can be seen embedded into its corresponding half-shell, which of course was fitted into the bearing seat in the block.  Can anyone explain why this disintegration might have happened ?

When I've seen that Pete it's always been with water contamination in the oil boiling off between crank and bearing surface. The localised overheating "marmalises" the bearing material which disintegrates and it comes off in bits sometimes transferring onto other parts of the bearing or along the crank oil flow outlets.

Mick Richards 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

4 hours ago, BlueTR3A-5EKT said:

There used to be a Glacier chart for identifying shell bearing failures.  Here is as close as I can find.

I would have guessed overheated or corrosion.

http://www.tribology.co.uk/services/failure-analysis/how-to-diagnose-plain-bearing-failures/

Cheers,  Peter W

Thanks Peter,  that's an interesting precis they present.  I then followed their own link < here >  to extracts of their " Tribology Handbook "  (in pdf format) which covers in a little more detail  " rolling element and plain bearing failure analysis, bearing material and lubrication selection." plus " Failure Analysis of Gears, Seals, brakes, clutches and Wire ".   There's lots to read in there ..and to learn from.  Excellent.

 

3 hours ago, Waldi said:

My best guess from the damaged bearing is corrosion from acidic products, that can form is the engine is left for a long time without running.

^ Thanks Waldi,   I would have thought the crankshaft journal would also have shown some residue sign / discolouration from that acidic corrosion  if it had happened while standing for the long period of time.  I would assume, from the flaked particles embedded in the other half-shell.,  the surface was breaking up while this engine was still running  ..so before being left sitting for 10 years.

 

3 hours ago, Motorsport Mickey said:

When I've seen that Pete it's always been with water contamination in the oil boiling off between crank and bearing surface. The localised overheating "marmalises" the bearing material which disintegrates and it comes off in bits sometimes transferring onto other parts of the bearing or along the crank oil flow outlets.

^    Thanks Mick.,  that sorta makes sense to me (I'm thinking steam vent holes near volcanic activity) ..and it might better account for it happening in only one main bearing shell.    With that scenario in mind - I'll study the area, and if possible to have it pressure tested ..to see if we might identify how / where water droplets might have locally gotten into that bearing's oil.

Otherwise I guess.,  it might possibly have been a manufacturing fault with just that one half shell

              ..or perhaps hammering of that rear bearing ..by an unsympathetic driver dumping the clutch for a tyre-burning kangaroo start  ?  

Pete.

Edited by Bfg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Bfg said:

^ Thanks Waldi,   I would have thought the crankshaft journal would also have shown some residue sign / discolouration from that acidic corrosion  if it had happened while standing for the long period of time.  I would assume, from the flaked particles embedded in the other half-shell.,  the surface was breaking up while this engine was still running  ..so before being left sitting for 10 years.

Hi Pete,

With this type of corrosion, the least noble elements act as “sacrificial anodes”. The bearing shells consist of an composition of several “lower noble” elements like lead (Pb) and tin (Sn). The crack shaft (and it’s journals) is mainly Fe, which is more noble is not attacked. The lead phase will be dissolved by the organic acids. Peter W.’s link above provides an example.

Waldi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7 January 2020 at 1:22 PM, Bfg said:

 

..for those who might be interested.  ordered on Sunday and delivered in Tuesday morning's post. .

P1330383s.thumb.jpg.2cdfc537742c2a5c710ad6cdfe384644.jpg

^ very tiny ' shop soiling' scratches seen on the face, but otherwise it looks beautifully made and finished in its very pretty cyan coloured anodizing. 

The Split seal part number reads M35BTR4.

P1330379s.thumb.jpg.5f4fcc962b47c5a359ba5f2cc2f97976.jpg

^ Instructions sheet together with invoice. The price was £79.15 including VAT and carriage.  

Pete

Pete,

No mention in those instructions about the length of the flywheel attachment bolts.

If they poke through the crank flange they will chew up the seal. (Impinge and trepan is the correct phrase I recall using in engineering reports)

I will be cutting my bolts to about 0.785" ,  based on the flywheel being 0.395" thick and the crank flange guess-timation of 0.400" thick.  Measuring the crank when fitted in a block that is mounted in an engine build stand is a challenge.   I will not be using lock tabs.

Could you measure the thickness of your crank rear flange to confirm my measurements please.

Cheers

Peter W

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, BlueTR3A-5EKT said:

Could you measure the thickness of your crank rear flange to confirm my measurements please.

Certainly, mine measures ;  0.441" (11.22mm).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

.

Today I looking in to valves and their seats..   

P1330400s.jpg.de6a350cfc3e9ebfdc09392738b3525c.jpg

Poor old (..ancient) valve compressor barely reached, thankfully from the other side of the cylinder head it was a little better. 

I started with the rearmost valves as that was the cylinder full of rust.  The exhaust valve seats will be replaced when converted to unleaded, but I wanted to see if the valves themselves were re-usable and of course to see how well the inlet valve seats had fared..  not really that good a news 

P1330403as.jpg.8d60f4a9759fceeb16d8b256f9994690.jpg

As they came out ^ inlet (above left) and exhaust (right).  As you might make out that inlet valve seat is in poor shape ..as indeed was the inlet valve itself. 

P1330421s.jpg.3175be94ba28d140167f185990ea2d19.jpg

By the time this is ground back to good, I fear the valve will be deeply recessed (poor for gas flow).  The exhaust valve is in much better shape,  but for quite deep rust pitting ..mostly on the combustion side. It would cut back to be usable.  The two valve guides were a nice fit.

Exhaust valves,  NOS Stanpart I found and have just ordered off  e-bay for £30 the set inc postage. 

P1330436s.jpg.c2e0f822d71c1f2833d26a965bb7c1d0.jpg

#3 cylinder inlet valve was similarly passed it.  Those in cylinders 1 & 2 were worn but re-grindable if needs be. 

 

WANTED please :  inlet valves OE part number 107626.   If anyone has NOS set that they might sell me, then please pm.

Thanks. Pete.

 

P1330405s.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Pete,

Just a thought: I did not bother regrinding my old valves, new ones from Wittor were 5-10 pounds each. The cost difference was very small; the new ones measured all ok.

Waldi

Edit: see you just beed the inlets:)

Edited by Waldi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Bfg said:

Certainly, mine measures ;  0.441" (11.22mm).

Thank you

Peter W

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

On 1/3/2020 at 6:36 PM, Bfg said:

From TR Enterprises

  • 1              Big Ends +10 (OE : Glacier / Glyco)                 £100.00
  • 8              Big Ends Bolts - x8 Stretch TR4A type              £67.20
  • 1              Crank Thrust - Set of 4  of +0.005"`                      £8.48
  • 4              Flywheel Bolt                                                                 £5.62
  • 2              Flywheel lock tabs                                                       £1.68
  • 1              Oil Pump - uprated spindle & rotor                     £59.00

                                                                                                                       £241.98

Ordered on Friday, received the following Wednesday's post  ..so pretty decent picking, packing & delivery time.  Total including £5 p&p was £246.78

P1330410s.jpg.235c6a0d6d003bac8817fcf9736ab408.jpg

 

 

P1330411s.jpg.1223013c4560412eb10ec73d8ff32064.jpg

^ for a such a crucial and supposedly precision part -  I cannot say I'm impressed.  Likewise were my thoughts on seeing the crankshaft thrust bearings. 

I had spoken with Revington, TR Enterprises, and the TR shop regarding these parts,  and each said they were made in India but were proven in use ..in their own rebuilds. TR Enterprises said that they were not comfortable with the quality of the actual shaft being supplied from India and so make their own. This (above) ' uprated '  set has their own shaft.

P1330414s.jpg.0b42bd812a6aff748fdc001e7c67db01.jpg

^ The original parts are on the left, the new replacement parts are on the right.  I was a little disappointed to see sharp inside corners of the forks on TR Enterprises shaft.  Their rotor has a mitre around both its top and bottom edge, so it cannot be put in the wrong way around (..or else is reversible when a little worn).

1. Checking the dimensions in the pump itself  (to compare with the measurements of the original components < here >)..   the shaft has the same dimensions, so the new is no tighter in the body.

2. The rotor to body tolerance measured 0.005"  ..so is the same as my original (shown below). .

P1330120s.jpg.4b77610ad6941af19d504770000819f2.jpg

3. However the clearance between the new spindle and the rotor was just 0.0025" , whereas the originals (below) had 8-1/2 to 10 thou ..so the new is very much better. B)

P1330119s.jpg.20cbbd6065d689cce578cb1183b2544c.jpg

4. the end float measures 0.0025" whereas the old one was 0.004".  Even so I'll reduce this to 0.002" before refitting

So, all in all - it is better, but perhaps not as confidence inspiring quality as I might have hoped for, when buying an uprated part from a reputable TR supplier.

- - -

P1330415s.thumb.jpg.d8553125489c0c0644acd2e8a0622087.jpg

The new thrust bearings don't look anything special, and for some unknown reason have pointed bottoms. But they are the size I require. I haven't yet checked that the squarer tabs which are to locate in the caps fit. They may require a little fettling. 

Above, I'm noting the thickness of the new versus the old.  During reassembly I will use the 0.920" & 0.925" original ones, forward of the main bearing, with a pair of new ones behind it. Loose assembling them, with the crankshaft in the block, yesterday confirmed my previous calculations were close, as measured these now gives me 0.004" crankshaft end float.  However, the back of the thrust bearing is heavily stamped with the part number (below) and I'll want to file that smooth down and also check the plate is flat before installing . .

P1330417s.jpg.b15fc0e6070d627578fb0f1ee75e3d67.jpg

 

Pete.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Pete,

very good you measured the clearances of the new pump. I fully agree with your remark on the sharp corner in the pump shaft, this is not what you expect/hope for.

My new oil pump (TR6) had better clearances than my original old one too, but shaft diameter and shaft lenght were different.

Effect: more oil loss through the bushing (the new shaft was smaller in diameter) and less mating surface between gear and pump shaft (the shaft was shorter).

Your good thorough work will reduce the risk of disappointments later on. Keep the updates coming.

Cheers,

Waldi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Afternoon Pete

still enjoying you post. I am having my engine rebuilt. The lads put the crankshaft on the balancing machine and said that they could probably only get it 70% balanced. As it had been worked on before not very successfully. I have got another from our local TR specialist (Craig TR Bitz) so that’s on the machine being balanced.

Mike. Redrose group 

665CDBDF-75C9-43F8-8A13-50C3EE287E12.jpeg

B0B3F335-7784-4AA6-A291-4D7F6101E580.jpeg

299F9746-0B57-4A26-B88B-DFD386ECD9DD.jpeg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

.

Thanks Waldi, I'll check the length of shaft on this one, not least because the square cornered slot to the fork is not as deep as the original, so I'll need to check it sits right relative to the drive spindle from the camshaft.

- - -

On 1/3/2020 at 6:36 PM, Bfg said:

And from the TR Shop, London

  • 1              Core Plug Set                                                                  £5.66
  • 1              Flywheel Ring Gear - bolt-on 4A                           £34.99
  • 1              Gasket set - Block                                                      £18.95
  • 1              Gasket set - Head                                                       £24.95
  • 1              Oil pressure relief valve - spring                               £4.75
  • 1              Piston + Liner set (87mm)                                    £255.00
  • 1              Seal - timing cover / Fr.Crank                                   £7.40
  • 1              Seal - Rr lip oil seal kit (scroll removal necessary)   £59.95      Cancelled in favour of Christian Marx (type ?) seal  

                                                                                                                            £351.7

added to order. .

  • 2              woodruf key (crankshaft)                                            £3.60
  • 1              Lock Tab - Camshaft sprocket                                   £0.75

                                                                                                                         £356.05

Ordered on Friday, and received this morning (Friday) from the the TR Shop in London.  ..so again decent picking, packing & delivery time.  The total  was £ 356.99 ..as orders over £250 include 'free' delivery. 

P1330439s.jpg.3ff247f2c2056f3c282716ef74516de3.jpg

I've only had a quick look inside the parcel, and have not checked anything dimensionally or otherwise inspected the items, but here are the first impressions. . .

P1330440as.jpg.c579245f8cd54c657855891957a99743.jpg

^ Much as one might ..expect nothing is branded.  Ain't it just lovely when a manufacture doesn't have the confidence to put his (or her) own name on their product.  The two gasket sets are said to be Made in England.

Oddly the bottom end gasket set is described as a 'conversion set' and yet is specified for the Vanguard 1941- 51, and the TR3 through to TR4A.. The delightful little TR2 doesn't get a look in.  The top end gasket set is for the TR4 : 86mm, so I'll have to check it's also suitable for the 87mm bore.  I'm guessing it would be because that's a rebore size.

P1330441s.jpg.49b3a4d31cb4e5819d12fe951f5b025b.jpg

^ detail.   The front timing case seal is a double lip seal with a manufacturer's mark of BTS and part number which is difficult to read but I think says 44.40 - 63.60 - 14.30. Another mark is partly missing but might read H-098.

The bolt-on TR4A ring gear, for the flywheel, is of particular interest to me as I want to fit it onto the TR3 flywheel I bought (which has a shrink on ring gear) .. so I very quickly compared them . . .

P1330446s.jpg.aa84b7f6a99f9f520724d1707983f39a.jpg

TR3 ring gear sitting on the TR4A one.  They have a differnt number of teeth and the 4A one is deeper cross section to accommodate the bolt holes.  What is not so obvious in this photo is that their outside diameters are different too .  .

P1330443s.thumb.jpg.84d7faab8386828187173fdd906245c3.jpg

This is with the opposite side's teeth aligned, it is the difference in diameter you see here (perhaps 3 - 4mm) rather than the difference in diameter.  The TR4A one is the larger.  Who knows, it may be unimportant, but personally I would have liked the hole to have been aligned with a tooth rather than being so close to the cutout inbetween.!

Below is showing the difference in inside radius (not diameter) between the TR3 ring gear (now on top) and the 4A one.

P1330444s.thumb.jpg.35bdb69ea2a585b9e4322ac261bcacb9.jpg

 

Moving on quickly .  .

P1330447s.jpg.4ee369b4c8c56ed1db037ba636d1dc89.jpg

Wet liner cylinders, with piston, pins and rings.   Pistons are said to be made in Taiwan.  Liners are said to be made in India. Piston rings for 86mm +0.040" are said to be made in USA.  And all together - Assembled in England. 

P1330450s.jpg.95ac244ef29e6a561836f5b804a081ea.jpg

First impressions re. quality (of finish) on everything - looks great.

So that's about it for today..

I did phone TR Enterprises and TR shop to thank them, and also to ask if either had NOS,  OE-spec inlet valves or perhaps an OE timing chain. The former said not, only Indian made parts, whereas the latter - speaking to Lucas I guess,  said they probably have the OE valves, but it might take him an hour to find them ..and that it wasn't worth doing unless he had a customer who would appreciate it ..and for £40 it wasn't worth it.  I'm guessing this was a kick-back to his having Vandervell main bearings for £120 which I didn't buy. 

I did start into saying that I understood, and that if he could lay his hands on things in his shop quickly it might be a different story,  but then I cut myself short and concluded the conversation by politely thanking him for the parts I had just received  (..I didn't say so but thought.. the £360 I just spent with him).

I put the phone down feeling aggravated by his attitude ..and that I'll not use them again  ..but then realised that would be just cutting off my nose to spite my face.  Certainly though, from now on, other companies will now be my first port of call,  and have the order if there's little to choose between the pricing. 

I am not a rich man, and I do shop in Aldi rather than Marks & Spencers or Tescos ..and I will struggle to afford this car,  but if you'd kindly just wipe me off the sole of your shoe Lucas, I will go my own way.  Thanks.

 

Edited by Bfg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, brenda said:

Afternoon Pete

still enjoying you post. I am having my engine rebuilt. The lads put the crankshaft on the balancing machine and said that they could probably only get it 70% balanced. As it had been worked on before not very successfully. I have got another from our local TR specialist (Craig TR Bitz) so that’s on the machine being balanced.

Mike. Redrose group 

Hi Mike, please do tell us more.  Is this the unbalance-able (if that's a word ?) crankshaft from Brenda ?  What led you to pull the engine and have it rebuilt after such frequent use.?  Do you have a thread or website blog somewhere I've not spotted. ? 

I see the flats ground away from the bob-weights, Perhaps this is someone's attempt to balance it ..without taking into account the mass of the con-rods.? 

Pete

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

.

..a quick comic-strip report of yesterday evening's activities .  .

P1330367s.jpg.7539bc62c41db77984f53b3abcb415f3.jpg

1. using a 6 lb hammer and a block of timber (oak, recycled kitchen chair's seat) as a hardwood drift to loosen the rusted liners out. Alternative knocking / hammering on one side of the cylinder's skirt and then on the opposite side, one by one they did (eventually) move. 

P1330461s.thumb.jpg.03ab22af99b4c508325b9131c1223457.jpg  

2. This is aged oak being used as a drift, the rear cylinder liner was particularly difficult to shift, and necessitated my chopping 3" off the end of the block to get back to solid timber again.

P1330463s.jpg.680e77f75e220733faf29547476a8a41.jpg

3.  Good upper body exercise but I was winning.   (NB. the crankshaft is in the background and is nothing to do with getting these sleeves out) 

P1330462as.thumb.jpg.e102e43a59d84754f63dcdfb00b304e1.jpg

4. a softwood block happened to (almost) fit ..to knock the sleeves further through.  The corners of the block shaved off as it went down through the casting. On a couple of occasions it got stuck in the hole and I had to drift it back out from the other side.

P1330466s.jpg.8a3d93a74ffe5f7a70e7d6e6008df36f.jpg

5. once they were a bit out they could be grabbed and wiggled out further.

P1330467s.jpg.deff2e50f7e23ea1464ba9aa644495da.jpg

6. one by one, there they go. The wood chips illustrate the gallant fight they put up.  They have after all been in there for 55 years.!

P1330468s.jpg.10a18e613728563f05d7c2b7b813bdd9.jpg

7.  there's a wider bit (being pointed to) further down the sleeve, which takes extra wiggle force to get out of the block.

P1330469s.jpg.34500170b698e133dd7b5e406340450d.jpg

8. where's there's a will ..a lump hammer and a couple of blocks, there is a way !

..and then the mud pies fun really starts .  . .

P1330471s.jpg.35a3bf7c55eba8df0908e9feb82acb1c.jpg

9. Surprisingly it was still wet inside the water jacket,  so after scraping out the big loose lumps - I set to with a bowl of clean water, a bottle of spray degreaser (used in the kitchen),  my old wood chisel for scraping, a pot cleaning brush, and a small wire brush in the cordless drill.  

Darn (or suitable descriptive words of your own choice) it was mucky in there.!

P1330473s.jpg.8d92f844f99a43cb4693fc57aabef796.jpg

10. it wasn't a five minute job, but good progress was made and the original inside casting began to reveal itself.   Mind you I couldn't see this as I worked, it only becomes obvious when flushed out with cleaner water and illuminated by the flash on the camera.  In reality I was working in the dark and couldn't see passed my own hand.  Talk about shining a light up one's own . . .. .!

You might notice that four more of the cylinder head studs have been removed.  These came out by undoing them by hand ..although to be fair I did use a cloth to get a grip on one of them.

P1330474s.thumb.jpg.171a3e0b53bbca7ab15a27f7f7749bbb.jpg

11. hung out to dry (literally) overnight, with the dehumidifier left on and its fan blowing towards the crankcase. 

Pete

 

Edited by Bfg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Evening Pete,

no you have not missed my posts, I am finding yours most interesting. At the moment I don’t have the time to carry out such a time consuming rebuild. I was losing a lot of oil from the push rod tubes and the catch tank was getting more oil in than usual. Did a pressure test on the cylinders and found that No4 was well down. We were thinking of doing the engine next year but as you know we do a lot of miles and decided to bring it forward. The crankshaft may of found another problem that I have being trying to rectify for a while, the car shakes at 57 / 62mph hopefully we can now get that sorted.

Mike and Carole. Redrose group 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would only use the genuine 'Mad Marx' rear crank oil seal conversion.

Here is a photo. of my 3A block after chemical cleaning. I would never advise using sand blasting as you can never clean the block out properly.

Tom.

DSCF0095 - Copy.JPG

DSCF0010 - Copy.JPG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Tom,

2 hours ago, Fireman049 said:

 I would never advise using sand blasting as you can never clean the block out properly.

In what medium do you think the engine block and cylinder head were cast ?

- - -

Might I ask did you paint inside the water jacket for rust protection ..and if so - what with ?

Pete.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Pete,

yes, the block was cast in sand, but Tom’s advice above is sound. For my TR6 block I had the block cleaned in an industrial washer used in large shops, think it used caustic. Next, the water side I cleaned with phosphoric acid, 30% ish. Same with the head. 
That was the wrong sequence. I should have first done the acid treatment of the waterways. No matter how much I cleaned them afterwards with a waterhosr, during start-up I had brown coolant from stuff (deposits) that was not removed before. I flushed again with water, then used a chemical cleaner from an automotive shop for cooling systems, flushed again and now my coolant stays clear.

I would not conserve the engine inside and also not the water system, for fear of paint flaking off, no matter how good you think it is cleaned.
The cast iron is porous, so 3-6 decades of oil penetrating in the casting cannot be made undone in all area’s.

The water system is protected from further corrosion by the coolant.

The external I painted with a PU black air (moisture) curing paint.

Waldi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

12 hours ago, Waldi said:

I would not conserve the engine inside and also not the water system, for fear of paint flaking off,

:lol:  . . .

On 1/11/2020 at 3:15 PM, Bfg said:

 

P1330468s.jpg.10a18e613728563f05d7c2b7b813bdd9.jpg

P1330469s.jpg.34500170b698e133dd7b5e406340450d.jpg

 

^^ Compared with this ^^  ..I don't think a few flakes of paint would have hurt.

I'm just kidding with you Waldi - Thank you. B)

 

Edited by Bfg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

.

a little of today pottering around ..but not in the garage. . .

P1330484s.jpg.6afca2d63a7ff6ff0eb348ac0746d574.jpg

^ Checking production tolerance of the new,  together with the old pistons of the con-rods.

P1330480s.jpg.58716c2bbe918261bd9663b89469f143.jpg

^ These are 86mm +0.040".   And this one was the heaviest (measured without rings). The four new pistons vary in weight by a total of 3.7g.  That's a very small percentage of 670+ grams 

P1330478s.thumb.jpg.c9f87101f318999ec0e88033e84e211c.jpg

^ Pistons are of course oval in shape, and so were aligned before measuring. Top piston to liner clearance is measured below the step by the third groove. The first two measured at 0.0035, the third and fourth measured at 0.0025 and 0.0045" respectively.  Swapping them over equalised things a little better so they are now 0.003 and 0.004" respectively.  I'll position those to be used as cylinder 1 (best cooled) and cylinder 4 (hottest). 

P1330479as.jpg.df1146fb389de251a4418fca98e0a95d.jpg

^ Bottom skirt clearance measured, again with the piston orientated, each measured has a minimum of 0.002", although what will be the forward cylinder is a rather "tight" 0.002".

All in all - Very Respectable quality control.  Thumbs up  B)

- - -

 P1330486s.thumb.jpg.6b169e0ea0b6a106b44fcd696cddd404.jpg

Don't know if you can read my scribbles but the bottom four rows / second column are the weights of the old pistons (with rings) and conrods (less cap and bolts), literally as they came out of the car. Unfortunately the shells were missing as I weighed conrods 3 & 4., but those shells weigh 27.1g - so after correcting those figures.. there's a difference of just 11.9g. That's less than 1% overall. I'm impressed.

My bottom four row's third column records the total weight of each con-rod, without piston, shells or cap, but with the gudgeon pin bearing still in place. As you can see, there's presently a difference of 12.7g  ..and yes I did turn the scales off and then check them again.  This coming week I'll scrub them up and do it again with the caps, shells and the new bolts, and also independently check both big and little ends.

- - -

Other (good) news is that I have been offered a set of  Standard-Triumph inlet valves to go with the Standard-Triumph exhaust valves. So when I get those in then I can get components over the the machine shop.  Things around here happen slowly but we are moving forward.

 

I have yet to go through the archives to see what has been said before,  but yesterday I learnt that my water pump does not have a bolt-on pulley. As it was locked up when I bought the engine I'm sure internal parts will need replacing.   Are the water pumps off any other Triumph the same ?   Any suggestions on how best to move forward ?

Thanks,   Pete

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"I'll position those to be used as cylinder 1 (best cooled) and cylinder 4 (hottest)."

Hmmm nope...try again parallel thinking required.

Mick Richards

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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