Clive Posted October 16, 2008 Share Posted October 16, 2008 Seems to have raised its head again, and I (for one, probably others) would be grateful if somebody could point out a site/guide as to what is required, ideally for the "locost" version. Especially need ideas on machining etc required.CheersClive Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mowerman Posted October 16, 2008 Share Posted October 16, 2008 Hi Clive, I looked into this for my Vit and spoke to Nick Jackson (?)and others. TBH for the cost from someone like Canleys versus the cost of a DIY version it works out cheaper for the ready built version. In many ways I was disapointed not to "do it myself" but the cost of new CV joints plus the cost of machining are the major proportion. The bought version is not perfect as in some instances a bit of machining (do-able with a die grinder) may be required on the rear uprights plus some "relief" may be required on the chassis rails. I`ve now run mine for three months and completetd the RBRR in it with no problems. If you want to look at my conversion or speak to me pm me. I`m just up the road from you in Horsham. Steve. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
black_rover Posted October 16, 2008 Share Posted October 16, 2008 Do you mean the Jones/Bowler CV conversion?Nick Jones http://www.tengaston.plus.com/Vitds1.htm#topJosh's old site http://www.gt6.ca/josh/cv_rotoflex.htmlAll the machining dimensions were here on this site, but I fear they have since been archived.To keep machining costs down, you could use modified Rover uprights, as Andy V and Jon Binnington have done, but you still need the adaptor plate on the diff machined up to accept the inner lobro CV joint. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nick Jones Posted October 16, 2008 Share Posted October 16, 2008 mowerman wrote:Hi Clive, I looked into this for my Vit and spoke to Nick Jackson (?)and others. TBH for the cost from someone like Canleys versus the cost of a DIY version it works out cheaper for the ready built version. In many ways I was disapointed not to "do it myself" but the cost of new CV joints plus the cost of machining are the major proportion. The bought version is not perfect as in some instances a bit of machining (do-able with a die grinder) may be required on the rear uprights plus some "relief" may be required on the chassis rails. I`ve now run mine for three months and completetd the RBRR in it with no problems. If you want to look at my conversion or speak to me pm me. I`m just up the road from you in Horsham. Steve. While it is true that if you want new everything then the Bowler/Jones CV conversion will be fairly expensive (comparable to or slightly more than the CC one), it is absolutely not necessary to use all new parts. You need 2 x LH driveshafts from a R100 together with the hub and 1 driveshaft from a Volvo 340 1.7 (has 2 joints on it). I have yet to find a CV joint that was knackered - just don't buy any with split gaiters or excessive play. That lot will probably cost you less than ? 50 quid from a scrap yard or a little more from ebay. Other than that you need to get hold of a pair of modified (or have some modified yourself) vertical links and a pair of CV-UJ adaptors. You'll also need a pair of new R100/MGF wheel bearings (about ? 20 - 25 each) and ideally some FF type gaiters for the inner CVs (the std volvo ones like to rub on the chassis) at about ?15 each. The expensive /tricky part is the VLs and adaptors. You can PM me about these.Properly done, this is a fit and forget conversion - no more disintegrating rotos or clicking UJs. Check out the prices of TR CV shaft conversions for a reality check!If you are really serious about low costs, copy my original conversion (the tengaston link above). This uses Mk3 escort 1.6 LH driveshafts and outer CVs withe the volvo inners. No VL machining is required. The original hub is re-used with a very small amount of machining. I freely admit it is an absolute sod to shim (the shims are between the bearings) and there is some aggro getting seals thin enough but it's still working on my car after about 20k miles (incl RBRR 2008) with no problems at all. This used machined-down volvo CV flanges welded onto the Triumph flanges - cheap and effective but non-reversible - this technique can be used with either of these conversions.Having recently helped out with the assembly of a pair of CC shafts I found that these presented or two challenges to be overcome as well.... though I take my hat to Mr P for his cunning re-use of Triumph parts!Nick(Death to the rubber doughnut!) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clive Posted October 16, 2008 Author Share Posted October 16, 2008 Will start to investigate. The tricky bit is the volve driveshaft IIRC (see, I do remember some stuff, but only when the grey matter is jogged) Metro stuff should be easy, but I would guess getting scarcer. CheersClive Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nick Jones Posted October 16, 2008 Share Posted October 16, 2008 'Tis true that Volvo 340s are dying out. Funny how scrapyard fashions changed. Wanted a 1.8 CVH sierra recently and couldn't find one .......Nick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greeks Posted October 16, 2008 Share Posted October 16, 2008 yup, had the same issue with Datsun driveshafts over here... seems they're all getting caned being rallied! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slimboyfat Posted October 17, 2008 Share Posted October 17, 2008 Nick_Jones wrote: though I take my hat to Mr P for his cunning re-use of Triumph parts!Nick!)Thanks Nick but I take little if any credit for the use of existing Triumph parts. Has no-one else ever wondered why that outboard CV looks like it was designed to fit in the rotoflex vertical link? Thanks to a certain senior Triumph engineer (via JK) for the heads up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slimboyfat Posted October 17, 2008 Share Posted October 17, 2008 cliftyhanger wrote: Metro stuff should be easy, but I would guess getting scarcer. CheersCliveI saw a Metro the other day. Nothing unusual in that you might say, but then I had to think how long it had been since I saw the last. Isn't it strange how a model once common just disappears from the roads? John Kippings parting words to me as he disappeared off the NZ 10 years ago were 'this Triumph thing will be over soon, get into Metros it's the next big thing!'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard B Posted October 17, 2008 Share Posted October 17, 2008 Slimboyfat wrote:John Kippings parting words to me as he disappeared off the NZ 10 years ago were 'this Triumph thing will be over soon, get into Metros it's the next big thing!'. Well, if you've got a 6R4 going cheap? ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ferny Posted October 17, 2008 Share Posted October 17, 2008 I've been thinking on and off of using a Metro for autotests. Not sure how good they'll be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clive Posted October 17, 2008 Author Share Posted October 17, 2008 GTi is a rapid little machine. Drove one with 3 miles from the factory right through the redline, scared me back in the day, I was not expecting that acceleration at all! Think if you can find a good one thay are OK. Not really pretty or sought after, but not a bad choice.But why not the acclaim?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ferny Posted October 17, 2008 Share Posted October 17, 2008 I don't want to wreck it - it's in too good a condition right now for that. Not perfect at all, but not something I want to risk abusing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clive Posted October 17, 2008 Author Share Posted October 17, 2008 abusing, cars, thats what they are for!!!Talkinhing of which, should I buy this? http://www.pistonheads.com/shop/asp/product.asp?product=238 or is it a bit too close to the truth 8) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ferny Posted October 17, 2008 Share Posted October 17, 2008 The Herald gets plenty to make up for both. ;)As for the t-shirt, this one might be better for you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nick Jones Posted October 17, 2008 Share Posted October 17, 2008 Slimboyfat wrote:Thanks Nick but I take little if any credit for the use of existing Triumph parts. Has no-one else ever wondered why that outboard CV looks like it was designed to fit in the rotoflex vertical link? Thanks to a certain senior Triumph engineer (via JK) for the heads up.I always thought the roto vertical link looked like is was designed for a CV joint.....I knew about the outer CV (mate used to have a 1500FWD) but it never occurred to me to use the propshaft pot joint for the inner and anyway I couldn't find a ready made driveshaft with the same spline as the 1500 CV....... Escort 1600 outer CV also fits (and comes with suitable driveshaft attached ;)) but lacks the shoulder, hence the need to move the shims to between the bearings to stiffen the hub up. I reckon there are other combinations that would work still out there - which may be needed when we run out of Volvos.....What I never understood was why they made the hub arrangement like it is....Nick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard B Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 Nick_Jones wrote:Escort 1600 outer CV also fits (and comes with suitable driveshaft attached ;)) but lacks the shoulder, hence the need to move the shims to between the bearings to stiffen the hub up. Just to resurrect this thread.I had the Ford Escort CV's (Mk3 & 4) machined so that the radius is removed. This then allows the CV to fit flush against the normal Triumph shims and is a direct fitment to the vertical link. This avoided the shimming problems experienced by Nick.I also had the vertical link machined by 30 thou where the seal sits. This was because the seal I had to get for the Ford outer CV was 68mm x 54mm x 10mm thick (20 thou thicker than the Triumph seal).I had a pair of Josh Bowler style adapters made for the Volvo 93mm Lobros.The only problem outstanding is; I got Mk4 Escort driveshafts and Nick used Mk3 Escort driveshafts. It looks like I will have to have circlip grooves cut in my driveshafts near the end of the driveshaft to hold the Volvo inner CV, (or get a pair of driveshafts from an Escort Mk3). I think this is working out to be the cheapest CV conversion yet! :)Just a bit time consuming..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clive Posted January 28, 2009 Author Share Posted January 28, 2009 We must talk MrB! I like locost, and time, well, not even a car yet, so no problem! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkDeTriomphe Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 Richard_B wrote:I think this is working out to be the cheapest CV conversion yet! :)Richard, what is the difference in machining costs between your set up and the latest Josh/Nick set up with the MG hubs? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard B Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 So far it's been a very minor work. Just taking the radius off of two CV's and machining 30thou off of the bottom seal face on the two vertical links. Cant put a price on it yet....Depends if I can get the Mk4 driveshafts machined to take the Volvo CV's or if I have to get Mk3 driveshafts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nick Jones Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 It is certainly the cheapest way to do it - even cheaper if you swipe the diff output flanges from the same Volvo, get someone to do a small amount of simple machining on them and then weld them to the Triumph diff output flange.I will say that I have reservations about leaving the shims on the end. One of the motivations for putting a spacer and shims between the bearings was that it stiffens the whole assembly up, which is important IMO as the Escort CV does not have the supporting land on it, leaving the thin inner section of the hub where the inner race of the inner bearing sits, unsupported. Trouble with having the shims in the middle is that it makes it a REAL, proper horror to shim correctly. However, mine is still going after at least 15k with no issues. I still firmly believe that the Josh's development is the better way and worth the extra cost (and not just because I have parts available!)CheersNickPic: No bolt-on adaptors here..... :P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michael Posted February 4, 2009 Share Posted February 4, 2009 thinking about machining escort cv to fit diff flange all volvos seem to have been scrapped around here what do we think? regards michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard B Posted February 4, 2009 Share Posted February 4, 2009 michael wrote:thinking about machining escort cv to fit diff flange all volvos seem to have been scrapped around here what do we think? regards michaelInteresting idea, try using the inner Escort CV's as a base. They are the ones with the 'plunge'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michael Posted February 5, 2009 Share Posted February 5, 2009 Richard_B wrote:Interesting idea, try using the inner Escort CV's as a base. They are the ones with the 'plunge'.machine inner cv flat inother words remove shaft that goes into gear box make aflange to weld tocv then bolt to flange what do you all think? loads of escort cv about regards michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clive Posted February 5, 2009 Author Share Posted February 5, 2009 There are volvo ones about, just a case of looking? found a pair on fleabay from somebody breaking a 340. They want £35+pp. A local volvo breakers are £20 each shaft, and you only need one. But I am getting 2, just in case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpeg.b15b81ef10abeea1c3039ae03c4a9f3a.jpeg)
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.