That was a year that was..

[Bfg]

.

Yesterday I pulled the bottom end apart,  but had already had a quick look at the middle main bearing journal. .

^ just a quick rub over with a piece of soft scouring pad cleaned off the caked-on oil residue from around the middle of this bearing. The ridge / wear of the journal is just about discernible by feel but we're probably talking of 0.001" or less. I'm happy to reuse that with new bearings but not reground.

Now to check the others, so quickly running through the task ..in comic strip fashion . .

^ fastenings removed for the rear oil-scroll caps.  Where there's a number of the same size fastenings I break their lock with a 3/8" socket, and then zip around removing them with a cordless drill. 

^ with the main bearing cap bolts removed (..again I like to check the torque of these as I undo them) its cap may be tapped upwards (via a hardwood block) and the oil-scroll plate is lifted out. This then makes room for a wooden lever to get in to lift the main bearing cap vertically out.

 

Main bearing cap as lifted, with the bearing shell still on the journal.

^ shell removed and a quick wipe reveals this journal looks and feels similarly barely worn .

^ this was the worst of the three, but imo there's not enough wear here to need a regrind. Subsequently I tried to measure what the wear was, between the centre 'ridge' where the oil way is compared to where the bearing actually runs, but my vernier gauge (or my own skills in using it) is not accurate enough to even measure half a thousands-of-an-inch wear. And yet I feel it ?

Moving on . .

^ the engine mount's plate is bolted to a gasket block ..which provides a bridge / a level surface for the sump pan to seal against.

And the front main bearing bolts are tucked away under that gasket block.

^ when undoing the timing cover fastenings, don't forget the one in the middle.

^ I expected a puddle of filthy black oil to dribble out, but there was not a drip.

^ the wooden block stops the crankshaft from turning as I undo the cam chain sprocket bolts.

^ Cam chain sprocket lifts off easily and I note there's a punch mark (finger is pointing to it) on the sprocket which corresponds to that on the end of the camshaft.

^ Camshaft bearing carrier has two bolts and then pulls out.  The other bolt alongside this is for the engine mounting's plate.

^ with the last bolts removed - the engine mount plate pulls off, but for the fact that the gasket glues it to the engine block ..so it's peeled away. 

^ looking a little naked now.  Seen just under the water pump is the screw thread of a stud, and a positioning dowel. A second dowel can be seen next to the crankshaft sprocket.

^ the sump gasket infill block has the cork in either end face but is easily tapped out with a wooden block. Its underside is scalloped to clear the main bearing bolts.

 

^ With its two bolts removed - the forward main bearing cap may also be tapped free.

^ That's it.. the crankshaft is free to lift out.  I used the winch to lift it out, not so much because of its weight as it awkwardness in reaching to both ends - so as to lift it out squarely.  Don't ask how I know that reaching and at the same time lifting is not good for my back.!

 

^ having already removed the front bearing carrier the camshaft itself just pulls out of the hole through the front face of the engine block. 

After a good clean up I will inspect and measure the camshaft to see if it actually needs replacing. First impressions is that it does not.   I would however be glad to hear feedback regarding what the difference in engine characteristics between the standard versus a high-torque camshaft (..when nothing else is changed ).   If this camshaft is still good, is it worth my spending another £100 - 200 in replacing it or having it re-profiled ?

That's it for today.

I wish you a happy New Year's Eve.

Pete.   

 

Edited December 31, 2019 by Bfg

[Hamish]

Well done Pete. Great progress in bite sized chunks.

looking forward to the next instalment and the full completion next year. 
H

[iain]

Nicely done.

If that timing chain tensioner is in reasonable to good condition, it’s worth considering re-using......the repros have been very poor.

Also when you reassemble don’t forget to use the short screw for the sump into the Ali block above the main bearing carrier.....it’s not currently damaged by wrongly using a long screw.

Iain

[Bfg]

2 hours ago, iain said:

Nicely done.

If that timing chain tensioner is in reasonable to good condition, it’s worth considering re-using......the repros have been very poor.

Also when you reassemble don’t forget to use the short screw for the sump into the Ali block above the main bearing carrier.....it’s not currently damaged by wrongly using a long screw.

Iain

Thanks Iain, I wasn't aware of either of those points.

what's the news on chains, can I get those from my local bearing / engineering supplies merchant or are these so special that need to go the TR specialist.  I wont want to skimp by buying a low quality chain. imo it's always worth the cost of a decent brand like Renolds, or has even that brand turned rubbish nowadays ?

Pete.

[Chilliman]

The chains on offer vary considerably in terms of quality, the last couple i've bought came from 'the chain man' and were Iwis, if you need contact details, let me know...

Edited January 1, 2020 by Chilliman

[Z320]

Hi Pete,

when my tensior was broken I checked the new one after 2 years,

fortunately it was still in good condition - in your case I would use the old one.

My chain is as Johns an "Iris", little ore expensive but still little money.

I used the old original sprockets, in my opinion in oil bath they are good for 2-3 chains.

I did nothing with the valve seats, maybe I'm careless - but it works without problems.

All the best for 2020

Marco

Edited January 1, 2020 by Z320

[Z320]

Sorry me, the trade mark is IWIS, not Iris

[Bfg]

13 hours ago, Chilliman said:

The chains on offer vary considerably in terms of quality, the last couple i've bought came from 'the chain man' and were Iwis, if you need contact details, let me know...

Thank John & Marco. 

I did look up Iris chains when you first posted and saw chains made in Spain predominantly for motorcycles.    Iwis chains are a different matter altogether and are German company - I'd be interested in these.  Perhaps you might post UK contact details or else send me a pm.

Cheers,  Pete.

[Ian Vincent]

17 hours ago, iain said:

Nicely done.

If that timing chain tensioner is in reasonable to good condition, it’s worth considering re-using......the repros have been very poor.

Also when you reassemble don’t forget to use the short screw for the sump into the Ali block above the main bearing carrier.....it’s not currently damaged by wrongly using a long screw.

Iain

Agreed, when I rebuilt my engine I fitted a replacement tensioner only to find that when I had camshaft issues after very low mileage that apart from the camshaft the new tensioner was showing significant wear. Fortunately I still had the original and with a bit of grinding was able to replace it such that the chain was wearing on a previously unused area. 

Rgds Ian

Edited January 1, 2020 by Ian Vincent

[Chilliman]

Pete, here's his contact email, he's always been very helpful & certainly knows his stuff.

andy@the-chain-man.co.uk

 

[Z320]

My IWIS is from Robert Babor's TR (and other classic english cars) workshop

Edited January 1, 2020 by Z320

[Bfg]

..

Ok holiday's over and we're back to work

          .. well even if the dustmen are having a couple of extra days, I was back into the garage yesterday afternoon  (now being warmed by my tiny stove < here > ).

Hands up, I admit, I made a mistake - as during strip down of the timing chest I had omitted to take some more measurements of wear.  So yesterday I had to take a step or two backwards so as do those.

Firstly though I cleaned the camshaft . .

 

The lift of this camshaft measures as 0.0267" ..which is 0.007" more than specification tells me it should be.! ?   Its cast-in part number reads ; 307036  ..and so not the same as 301466 specified in the Triumph Spare Parts Catalogue,  but 307036R  is noted in the Moss manual as ' Camshaft, exchange'.   Although it doesn't have (room for) the 'R' suffix - we might assume it was replaced at some time.  The engine's  number CT561xxE implies it was not a factory exchange unit, which show a 'FRE' suffix.  But judging by the unmolested condition of this engine, I wonder if this work was done by a Triumph trained garage mechanic.  Unless someone can shed some light on this, I'll probably never know.

Unfortunately, although the lobes are unworn this camshaft will need to be reground . .

^   it's not the only one as three other lobes have faults, although non quite as bad as this one.  I must admit starting the new year with another £250 bill isn't what I was hoping for.

 

Hey ho.,  moving on  

I tend to think of myself as being a slow thinker but given time I have average intelligence.  So it's with some surprise I am again finding the manuals to be poor. .

Although this camshaft is to be reground I wanted to check its end float, because like that of the crankshaft ; end-float has a direct bearing on the alignment of the timing chain sprockets.

Haynes manual says to check it with a dial indicator / depth gauge.  Great, but I don't have one.  The Standard Triumph manual says "Assemble the camshaft front bearing to the camshaft and temporarily attach the camshaft sprocket. Measure the end float of the of the front bearing on the camshaft journal as shown on Fig.49.  End float should be 0.003" to 0.0075". 

(NB. their 'Dimensions and Tolerance' table has a slight discrepancy insomuch as it says 0.004" to 0.0075".)

^ Ok that seems clear enough. .  so I put the camshaft back into the block, front engine plate on so I could fit the bearing carrier, and then pinched up the timing chain sprocket. 

All reassembled and armed with feeler gauges I set to it . .

^ oh yeah sure, I'm going to get a feeler gauge in there !   ..the arses !

so I tried to measure the end float another way. .

^ using a piece of softwood I wedged the camshaft forward in the engine block and measured the gap between the camshaft's end face and the bearing to be about 0.0025".   Well that's less than specification, but I guess if it's lasted all this time - it can't have been detrimental. After all if was too tight it would surely have worn looser ?

But then after I slept on it (did I say  I'm a slow thinker !) and woke to realise there was a much easier way .  .

 

^ That's the easy and accurate way to measure camshaft end float.  This one measure 0.005" so presumably the inside bearing face of the sprocket is slightly worn too.  Must admit, it does look polished but I'm surprised at the difference from what I had previously measured. But doing things this way is indisputable.  It's a little annoying that the illustration led me down the wrong path, and with the text and data page not being the same - I'm beginning to not trust that workshop manual.   

Next I cleaned up and inspected the sprockets themselves, for wear, damage and/or hooking of the teeth . .

^ these sprockets look to be in good shape.  I've arrowed the timing alignment marks as particularly the one on the crankshaft sprocket is not easy to find when it's in situ.   Indeed it was only after when taking this photo that I did see it.  I think blob of paint would help.  Note, the end journal where the timing-cover's oil seal goes - is in very nice condition too.

^ This is how the timing is set according to the book. with a straight edge from the centre-line of the cam-shaft sprocket, through the mark on the rim of that sprocket and to the mark on the crankshaft's sprocket. 

I next checked the chain for wear. .

^ 10mm in metric is easier than 0.4"  ..I haven't used a rule with 1/10" since I was at junior school ..a very long time ago.!  Although I believe my mother had a such a measure for use in dress-making.

The G-clamp helped hold things in place while I took the photo.  The edge of the red felt-pen mark on my steel rule indicates 10mm, so the wear on this Renolds chain is about 8mm.  That's within tolerance but I guess it's much easier to replace for another now rather than struggle after 20,000 miles when the engine is in the car.

 

The tensioner is worn but from what some have said in other threads - it's worth reusing as replacements seem to have a poor failure rate.  NB. the reddish colour marks are not rust they're are gasket goo.  

 

^ close detail of an Iris (a quality German brand) chain versus a "heavy duty" chain "manufactured for strength and longevity".

Aside from wear in the rollers ..measured as stretch of the chain itself - one of the great advantages of better quality timing chains is in the finish of the edges of the chain link plates.  Those which are figure eight in shape and those with a rough edge surface will each wear the tensioner very much quicker.  Of course, aside from that premature wear ; the metallic particles from either the edge of the links or the tensioner, are not good to have in your engine oil.!

 

Again moving on.,   I tried to check the alignment of the sprockets

This was less than successful, even with the camshaft blocked forwards (to take up its end float) and the crankshaft similarly blocked backwards (thrust washers temporarily back in place) I couldn't get them in line.  Indeed I could get a 0.006" feeler gauge to slip inbetween the straight edge and the nearside rim of the camshaft sprocket.  which according to my calculations says the sprockets (even so blocked) are  0.010" out of alignment.  As the crankshafts end float was 0.011", and the camshaft's end float was 0.005"  ..then these sprockets out of plane alignment was anywhere between 0.010" and 0.026".    

Although the camshaft bearing carrier could be shimmed out, I noted the crankshaft sprocket was not sitting flat to the end of the crank's journal   . .

 ^ I have not even tried to move this, sprocket, but I measure 0.019" gap in there.  This gap is where shims are fitted to bring the sprockets in line.  Without these the alignment of the sprockets would be very close.  I haven't tried to pull that off the crankshaft yet, as my puller is not appropriate ..and I don't want to risk damaging the sprocket.  I think I'll leave that to the machine shop / engineering company. I'm sure they must have an appropriate puller.

And so finally, for yesterday, I rechecked the crankshaft end float.

   

Before dismantling, I had measured this end-float as being 0.011" (measured between the flywheel's flange and the back of the engine case). Measured here inside the engine  it was exactly the same.

That's it for today. I hope something of it has been of interest.

Pete

[iain]

7 minutes ago, Bfg said:

 

But then after I slept on it (did I say  I'm a slow thinker !) and woke to realise there was a much easier way .  .

 

^ That's the easy and accurate way to measure camshaft end float.  This one measure 0.005" so presumably the inside bearing face of the sprocket is slightly worn too.  Must admit, it does look polished but I'm surprised at the difference from what I had previously measured. But doing things this way is indisputable.  It's a little annoying that the illustration led me down the wrong path, and with the text and data page not being the same - I'm beginning to not trust that workshop manual.   

 

exactly as the Official WSM said 

[Bfg]

7 minutes ago, iain said:

exactly as the Official WSM said 

yes, but not what the WSM showed

[Chilliman]

Depends if you've got the original WSM?.......

 

[iain]

OK so the diagram shows the camshaft and bearing in-situ, but the text is pretty clear, end float checked before installation..

[Bfg]

59 minutes ago, iain said:

OK so the diagram shows the camshaft and bearing in-situ, but the text is pretty clear, end float checked before installation..

I have the book John shows ..but I really cannot see those two words  before installation.

But I do see  "Measure the end float of the of the front bearing on the camshaft journal as shown on Fig.49." 

 

Edited January 3, 2020 by Bfg

[Bfg]

.

WANTED please ;   TR4 Main Bearings / standard size 

OE brand of ; Glacier / Glyco  or  Vandervell (now part of the Mahle group)

 

If anyone has a set of standard size OE brand of bearings sitting on their garage shelf I'd be interesting in buy them please.

Thanks, Pete

[Bfg]

.

This afternoon I ordered the first batch of parts ;

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

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   (scroll removal not necessary)   £79.15

Sub-totaling  £653.63  £672.83,  which when added to the £70 cost of the TR3 flywheel + £100 for the Borg & Beck clutch now adds up to £823.63  £842.83  ..on top of the cost of the engine itself.

I could have made savings, such as £50 off the Big-end shells - but there are some things, like this and the oil pump, I want to buy the best I can sensibly afford.   So these prices represent the best quality at the lowest price I could find ..without spending another month or two price checking everyone else.   There's nothing from suppliers like Moss, simply because some of their stuff is budget rather than best value, for a car I hope to keep  ..and I don't have the time to sort the wheat from the chaff so I've gone to retailers with good reputations.

Pete.

 

Edited January 7, 2020 by Bfg
price of rear lip seal changed to one where scroll removal is unnecessary

[Chilliman]

Quote

1              Seal - Rr lip oil seal kit (scroll removal necessary)       £59.95

You sure you want to go this route? It's not (IMO) the best way to go if you have a pefectly good scroll still attached...just saying...

 

[Bfg]

Thanks John,  

I pondered over this one quite a bit and read your & listened to different opinions by back searching this subject here and other TR forums, and of course talking to others in the club.  I also spoke with Enginuity who likewise prefer to keep the scroll when they rebuild engines. Conversely, I also know of my friend's experience with a Perkins 4108 marine engine which likewise uses a scroll seal. He had it rebuilt recently (costing him £5k) ..just because the drip into the bilges drove him to despair.  

I'm sure the crankshaft and the other two parts of the scroll seal can be assembled to the necessarily close tolerance.  Enginuity agreed when I suggested this should be within 0.001" ..and then it would be oil tight,  when the engine is running and the engine breather is in good order. 

In the end I asked myself a number of questions ;

• Are scroll or lip seals is now the preferred means of oil sealing an engine, gearbox, drive, steering, axle or brake component ..by almost if not all car / motorcycle / vehicle engine designers / manufacturers ?
• is it really practical for me (a self taught / home mechanic) to assemble the scroll seal to that sort of tolerance, and for it to stay put despite successive thermal heat cycles ?  The answer was probably yes ..if I bought the equally as expensive centering tool.  But the answer is still a 'probably' yes ..or possibly not.  Conversely, have I ever had issues with a lip seal in any engine, gearbox, drive, steering, axle, or brake component I've rebuilt ?   Nope ..aside from when a wrong part was supplied.  
• as the rest of the engine was machined to pretty crude +/- tolerances, can I reasonably expect each part of this scroll to be any better ?   
• if the preferred running clearance is 0.001" what happens when the crank flexes ?
• And if that clearance  is 0.001" ..what happens when the main bearings wear ?

I'm not saying I'm right, it's just the way I weighed up the odds.

Pete.

 

[Chilliman]

Pete, I acknowledge that you are possibly one of a limited number of new re-builders that actually read & research your subject properly before asking questions, I'm just not sure you understand the significance of the differnt seal options. The Christiam Marx seal keeps the scroll so you have all the original designed benfits of the scrolls sealing action whilst in motion but it adds an additional layer of protection in the form of a viton seal as well - so in summary it gives the best of both worlds a scroll & a viton seal working independantly of each other.

The 'remove the scroll & fit a Landrover seal' option was the best we had available 30 - 40 yrs ago & something I had done back then, but things move on.

If you do change your mind a & need a proper centring tool for the Christian Marx seal I can stick one in the post for you.

[Motorsport Mickey]

Pete,

Nobodies told you yet so I suppose I must.

The TR doesn't have a rear crankshaft seal system, ...it has a rear oil scroll scavenge system, the crankshaft scroll ( like a very coarse thread) is skimmed by an alloy 2 piece collar which has another very coarse thread pattern machined into it and positioned very closely to the crankshaft rear scroll (within a couple of thou). The alloy skimmer scrapes the oil film which is "stretched" by circumferential force off the crankshaft scroll behind the rear bearing and deposits it back into the sump. I have maybe 10 sets of alloy scroll seals without any/hardly any scroll machining left on them having been badly fitted during various other rebuilds (not mine !) allowing the scroll on the crank to carry out a little "off piste" machining on them.

It works perfectly and has the advantage of NEVER wearing out (nothing should be touching- anywhere) and it doesn't leak "...when the engine is running and the engine breather is in good order." UNTIL the crankshaft stops turning. Then without the mighty hand of the spinning forces involved the oil sags back onto the rear crankshaft scroll and drapes itself around it and out of the running clearance between the oil scroll and crank (about 1 or 2 thou) and stains your drive (worse if the car is parked uphill, and much less to not at all if the car is parked downhill, the oil being deposited back into the sump). We were a lot more relaxed about the odd spot off oil on the drive back in the 50s-60s but I agree we should try and stop it where we can. 

I've fitted the Landrover type seal a couple of times back in the 90s and had it leak after low mileages (20k) which I think reflected then upon the then quality of seal used ( I know how to fit split lip seals). Conversely since I've moved onto the Marx lip seal which as you know allows the original scroll fitment be maintained  (saving the crank for future use on that area) and saving the machining cost on the crank, £60-£100 ? , extra to the lip seal cost and these haven't leaked. This allows you to lay under the car with a torch and spot all the other leaks which puther out from various points on the engine/gearbox wherever.

My recommendation would be use the Christian Marx seal additional to the scroll.

Mick Richards  

Edited January 4, 2020 by Motorsport Mickey

[Z320]

Hi Mick,

thank you for this detailed explanation, also to Chilliman

Ciao, Marco

Edited January 3, 2020 by Z320

[Bfg]

John, Mick, thank you. I appreciate your feedback, advice and endorsement - as I regard both your opinions in high esteem, and such a discussion is both informative and thought provoking. Thank you also for the offered loan of that centering tool.

 

Interestingly (..or not)  the scroll on this engine is not to such a close tolerance . .

^   Perhaps I'm incorrect (the Triumph replacement camshaft is a confusion) but otherwise the OE spec / standard size bearings, pistons and general impression of gaskets, etc,  of this particular engine tend to suggest it's not been apart since being assembled by the factory.  But still that's an 0.008" feeler gauge which slips inbetween the aluminium collar and the crank's scroll. I wonder what +/- tolerance that scroll was originally machined to.  Almost certainly some were better fits than others. 

 

I was aware of the Christian Marx type seal and discussed it with engine builder, I was seriously considering using ; Bob Scott.  His recommendation was to not bother with it as it's particularly expensive and it seals against a surface (arrowed below) which was never ground / finished for such an application ..and on a 55 year old engine it's not likely to be in the best condition . .

He went on to suggest that the surface is rather too narrow, and that I'd be better off just removing the scroll and having that surface accurately ground and polished so that the lip seal has the perfect surface to seal against. 

As Mick explains, the oil-retention scroll stops working as soon as the engine is stopped ..and then oil is likely to seep passed it.  Its the lip seal which is doing the job,  so why retain the scroll.?   Furthermore, a case may be presented to say retaining the scroll is detrimental to the longevity of the lip seal,  insomuch as it limits lubrication and cooling of that seal during prolonged runs.

Regarding cost : 

• The Christian Marx type seal is £135,  and ..if that surface is usable, would need to be polished for the seal to run on. I don't know how much is that, but let's say £10. 
• John has very kindly offered to lend me the alignment tool, but otherwise that would be another £49.50 - £26 refund on its return, so £23.50 + P&P
• The Land-Rover type seal costs £60 and does require grinding.  The machine shop I propose to use ; JD Robertson, Colchester, have said that, if done at the same time as the big ends (so no additional handling and setting-up time) then to remove and prep this surface would be same cost as any other journal.  Their price is £16 +VAT for each.  

So, we have a cost difference of £168.50 versus £79.20

Pete.

p.s. can anyone advise what the number 084  means, which is stamped into the sump gasket face next to the front and rear main bearing caps ?

 

Thanks.