Jump to content

TR3 engine & box re-build


Recommended Posts

The long process of engine / gearbox removal, & re-building of both.

882909702_Gearboxcoveroff.thumb.jpg.67c1e7fe474affe611f1c27743b10db4.jpg

Took 2 hours to get gbox cover off, due to silly me sealing it down using polyurathane sealer. Wont make that mistake again.

Bob

Edited by Lebro
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 216
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Well done Bob. 
really looking forward to this enterprise being recorded here step by step. 
I’m sure that this task will be on my to do list at some point. 
 

good luck bob. 
H

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Bob,

thanks for starting. I want to remove the GB from the TR4 'Blue Racer'.

It has a horrible oil leak from the OD/GB adaptor plate. As I had success doing this job on the white 4A I will do the same to the  TR4.

I shall start late next week.

 

Roger

Link to post
Share on other sites

I entrusted my gearbox to Pete Cox last year - his charges were very reasonable.

The engine; I am in the process of reassembling it after taking it out to deal with an oil leak that turned out to be from the rear end of the camshaft.

Whilst it was out I took the opportunity to strip the engine down and have everything checked - crank (and all the spinning bits), crack tested and balanced, block cleaned and pressure checked, ditto the head.  I had been advised that the machining bill for doing an engine properly would be above £1,000 and sure enough, that is what it ended up costing me.  There were two cracks in the block that needed to be fixed, plus the seatings for the liners were corroded and uneven so they needed to be re-cut, which in turn meant that the block needed to be skimmed along with the liners decked.  And so it went on.....

But it is nice to put a clean engine back together.

Rgds Ian

PS Best of luck Bob. 

Edited by Ian Vincent
Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a note on the title of this thread.  I am sure, like Eli's and other threads, that this will become a terrific source of information for the future.  Could we please have the thread renamed something Like Bob's TR3A gearbox and engine removal and rebuild.  It will show up on internet searches and drive more participants to the site.

I have combed through a lot of threads for interest sake and found some really useful/interesting discussion/information in threads with titles that don't indicate what's in them.

This site is beyond impressive with the wealth of knowledge sitting behind keyboards.  Not to mention the incredibly helpful regulars.  It is a resource that should not be wasted or kept hidden. 

I hope I am not overstepping my bounds here, and I am definitely an extreme case of automobile ignorance, but I am sure it will help all and hopefully encourage some new enthusiasts, like me, to take the plunge and perpetuate the Triumph legacy on a broader scale.  With things the way they are in the world, this is an opportunity. 

Thank you very much to everyone for your help to date.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Engine has done at least 75000 miles, has failing oil pressure, & some top end rattles.

Intend stripping & rebuilding myself, but get Modern & Classsic to crack test , grind & balance the crank etc, & clean & machine (if required) the block.

I have new maxspeedrods con rods, & new 87mm liners & pistons to fit.

The gear box is a 1972 saloon box with o/d,

works OK, but getting noisy, intend changing all bearings & using the Moss 3 bearing counter gear with a new layshaft.

O/D was rebuilt in 2013 so will not touch, & I re-built the cylinder head earlier this year, so that is done.

Bob.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Lebro changed the title to TR3 engine & box re-build
1 hour ago, Lebro said:

Engine has done at least 75000 miles, has failing oil pressure, & some top end rattles.

Intend stripping & rebuilding myself, but get Modern & Classsic to crack test , grind & balance the crank etc, & clean & machine (if required) the block.

I have new maxspeedrods con rods, & new 87mm liners & pistons to fit.

The gear box is a 1972 saloon box with o/d,

works OK, but getting noisy, intend changing all bearings & using the Moss 3 bearing counter gear with a new layshaft.

O/D was rebuilt in 2013 so will not touch, & I re-built the cylinder head earlier this year, so that is done.

Bob.

This will be a good experience to follow thanks Bob.

However, I don't really understand your NEED to do it. I've toyed with the idea to do a full rebuild on my daily driver but can't make the case to actually do it. I'd be interested in why you would take the car off the road to do it now.

I've done maybe 150,000 or more miles in my daily driver TR2 since I bought it in 1976. About 80,000 miles ago I fitted new rings and bearings. Gearbox and diff were overhauled about the same time after failures in both, separately.

Oil pressure is still great at 65-70 hot at cruising speed, 30 at idle. Compression is still good. The engine isn't much more rattley than my new engine in the other TR2. Car goes really well and gearbox works OK.

I get the urge to do it because of the miles but performance is still excellent, so why take it off the road. 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Bob,

Be careful with the Max rods.Due to the big end caps being

divided horizontally across the centre of the rod, the rod is just a little bit

wider at the top of the stroke or was in my case.

All of mine, ever so slightly, nicked the bottom of the liners, on gentle rotation

by hand, causing a half moon chunk to get knocked off the bottom of

the liners.Not the end of the world, as its the very bottom of

the liners where they protrude below the block spigot and can be ground to give the

necessary clearance.

Triumph rods being divided on the diagonal of course, don't have this potential problem as

the angled bolt bosses reduce the width of the rod.

Good luck

Roger M-E

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, David Owen said:

Just a note on the title of this thread.  I am sure, like Eli's and other threads, that this will become a terrific source of information for the future.  Could we please have the thread renamed something Like Bob's TR3A gearbox and engine removal and rebuild.  It will show up on internet searches and drive more participants to the site.

I have combed through a lot of threads for interest sake and found some really useful/interesting discussion/information in threads with titles that don't indicate what's in them.

This site is beyond impressive with the wealth of knowledge sitting behind keyboards.  Not to mention the incredibly helpful regulars.  It is a resource that should not be wasted or kept hidden. 

I hope I am not overstepping my bounds here, and I am definitely an extreme case of automobile ignorance, but I am sure it will help all and hopefully encourage some new enthusiasts, like me, to take the plunge and perpetuate the Triumph legacy on a broader scale.  With things the way they are in the world, this is an opportunity. 

Thank you very much to everyone for your help to date.

Well said David.  I agree with your comments.  I too struggle to find useful hints/tips when the thread title is not succinct.  The database search system ought to work but seems to be not accurate.

My brother has just started a similar task on his TR2 engine and we are at the  - what bits do we have/need stage.  Originally the bottom end lighten/machine/balance/nitride/straighten/shot peen, was all done by Oselli.  The reason for the strip and rebuild is to get the head decoked.  The valves were badly coked and all the guides were worn.  That has been done by Pete Burgess, so all we need to do now is clean and rebuild the rest of the engine.

Cheers

Peter W

Edited by BlueTR3A-5EKT
Link to post
Share on other sites

Title changed as suggested.

IMG-20201026-WA0001.thumb.jpeg.bc54dfc655354d6ab4c1d13c88754ca9.jpeg  Front off. still drivable as need to shuffle cars around before the lifting commences.

Anybody else noticed that re-sizing photos no longer works - it seems to when composing the post , or editing it, but when you save, the photo goes back to being full size ?

Edited by Lebro
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, John McCormack said:

 

However, I don't really understand your NEED to do it. I've toyed with the idea to do a full rebuild on my daily driver but can't make the case to actually do it. I'd be interested in why you would take the car off the road to do it now.

Hi John,

Winter is just around the corner so doing the job now means less down time for driving these Cars.

I did a mini refurb of my 4A int he spring during our C19 lockdown. I am just about to take the GB out of the TR4 to sort an oil leak.

 This may be in the back of Bob's mind

 

Roger

Link to post
Share on other sites

Call it "preventive maintenance"   As Roger says now is a good time to do it, as winter is coming, & we have no TR meetings to go to (thanks Covid)

Bob.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Lebro said:

Title changed as suggested.

  Front off. still drivable as need to shuffle cars around before the lifting commences.

Anybody else noticed that re-sizing photos no longer works - it seems to when composing the post , or editing it, but when you save, the photo goes back to being full size ?

Thanks for the title change Bob.

 

I resize all my photos before saving them before posting.  It doesn't affect quality enough to make any visual difference and saves space on my phone/cloud storage.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You misunderstand - I don't mean alter the file size, I mean use the forum facility (which used to work) to reduce the size on screen of the picture.

Yes, I also make sure the file size is only a few hundred K at most.

Bob.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Lebro said:

You misunderstand - I don't mean alter the file size, I mean use the forum facility (which used to work) to reduce the size on screen of the picture.

Yes, I also make sure the file size is only a few hundred K at most.

Bob.

 

Get used to it, I ain't that bright. :lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites

I suppose that is a consequence of our different weather environments. We drive them all year round.

I do a lot of preventative maintenance but not where the car can't be driven for a long time, unless it is really necessary.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

John.

I do normaly drive mine all year round also (but avoid salted roads) but with no organised meetings or runs this year, now seems a good time to do what will need doing eventualy. 

Plus, having worked on the cylinder head earlier this year, planning the new compression ratio of 10:1 on the basis of 87mm bores (currently 83) in addition to a cam change I should end up with a bit more power to play with.

Bob.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Lebro said:

John.

I do normaly drive mine all year round also (but avoid salted roads) but with no organised meetings or runs this year, now seems a good time to do what will need doing eventualy. 

Plus, having worked on the cylinder head earlier this year, planning the new compression ratio of 10:1 on the basis of 87mm bores (currently 83) in addition to a cam change I should end up with a bit more power to play with.

Bob.

More power is always good. Both my cars have 87mm liners and the daily driver has since I bought it. I'm not sure I've driven a TR with 83mm, pretty rare here.

I now have two very similar TR2s, the daily driver with a high port head and 1 3/4" SUs and the long door with a low port head and 1 1/2" SUs. The low port head is much better around town, significantly more torque and low down power and better economy. It also revs better but that is probably because it was a race engine and is fully balanced whereas the daily driver isn't. 

I read about the lockdowns over there. Not a good situation but I note in the stats that the loss of life is very significantly reduced from the earlier wave. At least that is a sort of positive.

We are nearly back to full steam, standfast Victoria which had its own horror story. TR Register events are back on which has been a big boost to the members.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/27/2020 at 8:26 AM, Lebro said:

John.

I do normaly drive mine all year round also (but avoid salted roads) but with no organised meetings or runs this year, now seems a good time to do what will need doing eventualy. 

Plus, having worked on the cylinder head earlier this year, planning the new compression ratio of 10:1 on the basis of 87mm bores (currently 83) in addition to a cam change I should end up with a bit more power to play with.

Bob.

Hi Bob

I now you have probably read all the saga re Cams and followers, but if not it would be worth it. I have just installed follower set No 3......The Uprated Tuffrided followers from the usual suspects are in my opinion too big, they start to seize/gall at moderately high running temperature (9C above normal). The bore diameter on my engine and another checked for comparison was a constant 0.9375", the followers as bought and thoroughly cleaned are pretty much the same. There is negligible clearance by my measurements 0.0009". Way too tight.

Also check the cam lobes are offset enough when viewed from above, some cams are not and result in the followers not spinning, and with the advantage of teh side drain hole oil lubrication is limited especially if they are too tight a fit.

My sons diagnosis was 

A bit more digging and the fit those tolerances are currently showing are waaaaaay to tight for a free running bearing. It just falls under a H8/f8 clearance fit which iso guidelines say is "close running fit on accurate machines for accurate location at moderate speeds and journal pressures" and it's on the very very edge of that.

You could take the followers down to 23.759mm (0.9354 inches) and still be under that fit definition. 

H9/d9 fit would be more appropriate for this application "free running fit, good for large temperature variations and high running speeds" 

Which would let you take another 100um off the diameter of the follower.

 

Hope this helps

Iain

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, iain said:

Hi Bob

I now you have probably read all the saga re Cams and followers, but if not it would be worth it. I have just installed follower set No 3......The Uprated Tuffrided followers from the usual suspects are in my opinion too big, they start to seize/gall at moderately high running temperature (9C above normal). The bore diameter on my engine and another checked for comparison was a constant 0.9375", the followers as bought and thoroughly cleaned are pretty much the same. There is negligible clearance by my measurements 0.0009". Way too tight.

Also check the cam lobes are offset enough when viewed from above, some cams are not and result in the followers not spinning, and with the advantage of teh side drain hole oil lubrication is limited especially if they are too tight a fit.

My sons diagnosis was 

A bit more digging and the fit those tolerances are currently showing are waaaaaay to tight for a free running bearing. It just falls under a H8/f8 clearance fit which iso guidelines say is "close running fit on accurate machines for accurate location at moderate speeds and journal pressures" and it's on the very very edge of that.

You could take the followers down to 23.759mm (0.9354 inches) and still be under that fit definition. 

H9/d9 fit would be more appropriate for this application "free running fit, good for large temperature variations and high running speeds" 

Which would let you take another 100um off the diameter of the follower.

 

Hope this helps

Iain

Yep, had this problem recently so I emery stoned down the burr that surrounded the oil drill hole in the follower side.  Also scotch bright polished the follower exterior to ensure a smoother running fit.

Peter W

Link to post
Share on other sites

I’d didn’t have a problem with the fit on any occasion, they rotated freely and ran up and down, just when heat gets involved it all went to pot. Im guessing but the followers may not be the same material as the originals and therefore they expand faster than the originals.

Also I have a theory that the drain hole is part of the problem.

The original followers would fill with oil and then overflow to provide lubrication. These drilled versions save the weight of oil but, if they don’t spin, provide negligible lubrication, They then heat up expand and start to stick. Hence the need for a decent clearance.

Iain

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.