Spitfire Engine and gearbox out. Now what?

[PeteStupps]

4 hours ago, standardthread said:

Unless I'm totally wrong the MkIII is identical to the Herald 13/60?

Not quite, the mk3 Spit has higher compression head, sportier camshaft timing plus cam bearings. That's compared to the early 13/60 Herald. I believe later 13/60s then also had the larger journal crankshaft.

[Banksy82]

12 hours ago, standardthread said:

So if you got a 1500 Spitfire engine, unless it has been stripped, would have carbs and clutch, with just driven plate to switch over? (I stand to be corrected), but if not, a change of flywheel with correct driven plate.

Good to know!

12 hours ago, standardthread said:

HS4's and manifolds are available, I have a refurbished pair that I posted on here a few months ago, no I'm not trying to sell you them.

😄I would be interested to know what you were asking for them? They seem to be listed for silly money sometimes!

[Banksy82]

9 hours ago, PeteStupps said:

Not quite, the mk3 Spit has higher compression head, sportier camshaft timing plus cam bearings. That's compared to the early 13/60 Herald. I believe later 13/60s then also had the larger journal crankshaft.

From what I can tell from reading various sources the MKIII (small journal) and Early MKIV (large journal) engines had similar power outputs (measured differently apparently) with the later MKIV Engines (mine) being down on power from the previous ones (does anyone know why? Head, cam?)

Small journal Herald engines seem to be better value than the original MKIII spits, the question is can I put a MKIII profile cam into a herald 13/60 small journal and use my late MKIV head to achieve a similar free revving engine to the MKIII?

I don't particularly want to spend extra cash on the first two letters on the block if I am going to have to rebuild it anyway??

 

[yorkshire_spam]

A useful cross reference in terms of heads on blocks and CR/valve sizes: http://auskellian.com/paul/links_files/performance_enhancements.htm#Raise_the_Compression_Ratio

5 minutes ago, Banksy82 said:

Small journal Herald engines seem to be better value than the original MKIII spits, the question is can I put a MKIII profile cam into a herald 13/60 small journal and use my late MKIV head to achieve a similar free revving engine to the MKIII?

Yes, cams are interchangeable. 

[standardthread]

43 minutes ago, Banksy82 said:

Good to know!

😄I would be interested to know what you were asking for them? They seem to be listed for silly money sometimes!

Make me an offer, I think I paid about £75 before I cleaned them and fitted new ADN needles. But they're not going anywhere so no rush.

[Banksy82]

16 minutes ago, yorkshire_spam said:

A useful cross reference in terms of heads on blocks and CR/valve sizes: http://auskellian.com/paul/links_files/performance_enhancements.htm#Raise_the_Compression_Ratio

Yes, cams are interchangeable. 

Fantastic resource! Thank you!

It looks like the Early and Late MKIV heads are very similar (the late one I have having a larger intake valve - bigger is better, correct? 😀).

From the workshop manual it looks like the major differences between early and late are the valve timing (camshaft) and the advance curve on the dizzy? 

I'm feeling the start of a plan....

[Banksy82]

7 minutes ago, standardthread said:

Make me an offer, I think I paid about £75 before I cleaned them and fitted new ADN needles. But they're not going anywhere so no rush.

I'll bear that in mind! Even with some extra to cover your work and the needles I imagine that would work out more reasonably than I've seen elsewhere.

Thanks

[PeteStupps]

55 minutes ago, yorkshire_spam said:

Yes, cams are interchangeable

With the caveat that the mk2/mk3 cam has smaller journals to allow for cam bearings. My understanding is bearings were deleted after the mk3 and never present on the Herald engine, so the camshaft journals for Herald and later Spits is a bit larger. 

@Banksy82 you can fit cam bearings to your mkIV block and slot an original mk2/mk3 camshaft in, or get the 'large journal' version from Canleys which doesn't require bearings.

I changed the cam bearings in my engine, and ended up buying a tool specifically for the job. Not a technically difficult job but care must be taken to line up the small oil passage holes.

[yorkshire_spam]

@PeteStuppsYes sorry, I over-simplified... good clarification! Cams are interchangeable for the same cam size/bearing arrangement, as you say!

 

[standardthread]

27 minutes ago, Banksy82 said:

Even with some extra to cover your work and the needles

 

No, just enough to cover what I paid (or less!), needles are gratis. I don't have a need for them.

[PeteStupps]

32 minutes ago, Banksy82 said:

It looks like the Early and Late MKIV heads are very similar (the late one I have having a larger intake valve - bigger is better, correct? 😀).

From the workshop manual it looks like the major differences between early and late are the valve timing (camshaft) and the advance curve on the dizzy? 

I'm feeling the start of a plan....

Yeah bigger is generally better for the inlets when you're looking for high-revving performance. There is always some trade-off with these things but the big valves are the ones I had my mk3 head machined to accept. And I'm happy with how it goes.

It is worth bearing in mind that the difference between small journal and large journal engines is pretty much undetectable on the road - or at least it's not the crank journal size that matters most. I've driven a mkIV with a fast road camshaft and it was more free-revving than my standard mk3, for example. And my small journal 1300 saloon runs out of puff before 5000rpm because it's got a tiny exhaust and mild camshaft.

People building race engines prefer the small journal because it starts to make a big difference when you're running up to 8000rpm.

[standardthread]

Going back to your previous post about vertical marks (scratches) in the bores could it be a cracked ring(s) or a piece of proverbial stuck in a ring groove?

I've just looked at my Standard official WM and it looks like the pistons can be withdrawn downwards once the crank is removed (I've never done it that way). A good ring compressor should(?) be able to get the pistons in back past the remaining deposits you mention.

[Banksy82]

3 hours ago, PeteStupps said:

It is worth bearing in mind that the difference between small journal and large journal engines is pretty much undetectable on the road

That is interesting and might change things a little.

3 hours ago, PeteStupps said:

People building race engines prefer the small journal because it starts to make a big difference when you're running up to 8000rpm.

I don't explore the rev range anywhere near that much (5500 from time to time) so if I can obtain a better block than mine quickly I may be better off installing that in the meantime and rebuilding mine with an improved cam, rebore and crank grind. The car would then end up with the 'correct' engine (Not that it matters much!)

Thanks for all of the info - really helps narrow down some options!

[Banksy82]

3 hours ago, standardthread said:

Going back to your previous post about vertical marks (scratches) in the bores could it be a cracked ring(s) or a piece of proverbial stuck in a ring groove?

I've just looked at my Standard official WM and it looks like the pistons can be withdrawn downwards once the crank is removed (I've never done it that way). A good ring compressor should(?) be able to get the pistons in back past the remaining deposits you mention.

Yes, I don't see why that wouldn't work. With the amount of wear in the bores I would feel apprehensive about moving any of the rings from their current location as they must have worn to the same shape as the bores - I feel like I could make thing worse (probably already have!)

[RobPearce]

On 21/09/2022 at 19:43, Banksy82 said:

It is my understanding that the 1500 used different flywheel hardware and I don't fancy drilling out my flywheel - but I could be very easily wrong on this!

23 hours ago, standardthread said:

Got it slightly wrong, I think. The difference between the 1500 and MkIV clutch is the gearbox fitted to it, the 1500's have single rail 20 spline boxes, as do all Dolomites apart from the early versions, they had 10 spline three rail boxes.

It's a bit of both, in fact. The 1500 clutch is fine spline but also a larger driven plate than the 1300, with a ring on the flywheel for the cover to attach to. The flywheel attachment to the crank also uses larger bolts than at least the earlier 1300s. My Spitfire has a 1500 engine with a Mk4 gearbox using a 13/60 flywheel that we had the fixing holes reamed out on.

[sparky_spit]

On 22/09/2022 at 11:27, standardthread said:

Going back to your previous post about vertical marks (scratches) in the bores could it be a cracked ring(s) or a piece of proverbial stuck in a ring groove?

I've just looked at my Standard official WM and it looks like the pistons can be withdrawn downwards once the crank is removed (I've never done it that way). A good ring compressor should(?) be able to get the pistons in back past the remaining deposits you mention.

Unfortunately you can't fit (or remove) the pistons and their rods out of the bottom of the engine as the webs in the block that support the main bearings are in the way. I've just had a quick look at a block and pistons I currently have mounted on an engine stand and they have to come out, and be put back in, through the top of the bores. Sorry.....

Edited September 23, 2022 by sparky_spit

[Banksy82]

Thanks for all of the engine input - I am likely picking up a second short engine in the next few weeks. The plan is to build up the best of the two with minor replacements - bearings, thrust washers etc and get the car back on the road while I rebuild the other.

Time then to turn my attention to the gearbox and O/D. It is a 3 rail with a D-type overdrive with two known issues before removal.

1. Whining noise when out of gear - disappeared when clutch depressed. I put this down to release bearing - but I guess could be the excessive crank end float as someone mentioned previously. 
2. When first started overdrive takes some time to engage but this improves with time, after 10 mins of motoring it flicks in and out just fine. 

After separating the box from the engine I discovered that the clutch arm was flapping about in the breeze with no pin at all.

Plan is to generally clean the unit and then to replace the throw-out bearing anyway as I already have a spare that came with a NOS clutch that I have and then replace the missing pin....

The Moss catalogue talks of a tolerance ring, I'm guessing this is the wrap of steel in the clutch arm itself and then the pin is simply prevented from falling out the bottom due to a friction fit / force of habit? Does anyone have any experience of this? It feels like a recipe for missing pins but I'm thinking Triumph must have had a reason for this arrangement.

Along with this is there any other recommended work / tests / measurements.

Thanks again

Karl

[yorkshire_spam]

My gearbox has a reduced head long flange bolt with the threaded section cut off in place of the pin+tolerance ring. It's been like that since I swapped the gearboxes about 8 years ago. (IIRC it was a spare bolt I nicked from a Freelander)

 

[Banksy82]

11 minutes ago, yorkshire_spam said:

My gearbox has a reduced head long flange bolt with the threaded section cut off in place of the pin+tolerance ring. It's been like that since I swapped the gearboxes about 8 years ago. (IIRC it was a spare bolt I nicked from a Freelander)

 

Good to know - I think I'll just turn up a 5/16 pin from stainless with a head small enough to fit down the main bore in the casting but bigger than the bore in the bronze bush just to prevent it ever falling through.

 

[Clive]

1 minute ago, Banksy82 said:

Good to know - I think I'll just turn up a 5/16 pin from stainless with a head small enough to fit down the main bore in the casting but bigger than the bore in the bronze bush just to prevent it ever falling through.

 

I would hesitate to use stainless, more likely to fracture. I have used long 5/16 bolts, I recon a cap head would be ideal.

As to gearbox noise, I suspect front bearing or mainshaft tip bearing. These are rotating, but stop when you depress the clutch. You should hear my Honda Jazz, in fact easily heard from some distance!

Mainshaft tips are notorious on the 3 rail gearboxes. (4 cylinder engines obviously less of a problem than the 6's, but they still wear) 

Check for input shaft waggle. 

[Banksy82]

14 minutes ago, Clive said:

I would hesitate to use stainless, more likely to fracture. I have used long 5/16 bolts, I recon a cap head would be ideal.

Noted! 

15 minutes ago, Clive said:

Mainshaft tips are notorious on the 3 rail gearboxes. (4 cylinder engines obviously less of a problem than the 6's, but they still wear) 

Check for input shaft waggle. 

Just been out to the workshop - I have about 90thou movement in either direction when I 'waggle' the input shaft with moderate force by hand... I take it that it is the needle bearing that fails and takes out the mainshaft tip with it? 

 

[Clive]

22 minutes ago, Banksy82 said:

Noted! 

Just been out to the workshop - I have about 90thou movement in either direction when I 'waggle' the input shaft with moderate force by hand... I take it that it is the needle bearing that fails and takes out the mainshaft tip with it? 

 

That isn't a lot (2mm or so, I tend to think in metric) 

No idea what goes first with the tip, but seen plenty with them everly damaged. A friend has fixed his by machining it round and made a bush, including a scroll to wind oil into the bearing. Quite possible to use a torrington needle roller too if machined to an appropriate size. However, reducing the mainshaft to tip size is only going to make the weakness worse. But balance that against the type of driving. ie the chap who machined his has done over 100K in his mk3 spitfire and the gearbox is still sweet. He doesn't thrash it, just does 5-8k a year in it.

Of course, you may decide that you don't want to go down the route of a gearbox rebuild just yet. Fresh oil, cleaning the filters etc may help, and it may well go on for many thousands of miles. Maybe "see how it goes" and have a think when you do your next major engine work?

[glang]

1 hour ago, Clive said:

As to gearbox noise, I suspect front bearing or mainshaft tip bearing. These are rotating, but stop when you depress the clutch. You should hear my Honda Jazz, in fact easily heard from some distance!

Could also be layshaft needle rollers as this is also stops spinning when the clutch is depressed. In fact very difficult to disguish between noise from this and the tip but it doesnt matter as in both cases the gearbox has to be dismantled and then it becomes obvious.

It is important to overhaul the gearbox before a catastrophic failure of a bearing as that could damage gears as well...

[standardthread]

3 hours ago, Banksy82 said:

Whining noise when out of gear

After separating the box from the engine I discovered that the clutch arm was flapping about in the breeze with no pin at all.

The Moss catalogue talks of a tolerance ring,

 

Whining noise could be main box bearings. I re-built the box for our Standard 10 (very similar box through to the MkIV box) and cleaned and spun the bearings with compressed air, they sounded fine so didn't replace them. Back in the car the box was still noisy, box out again, bearings replaced, a lot quieter. It's not a difficult job to knock the input shafts out of a box, press new bearings on to the shafts and replace the needle roller, giving the box a good wash out with petrol or paraffin before you dismantle it.

The tolerance ring is a kind of crimpled washer in the release arm, held in place by correctly positioning the phosphor bronze bearings in the bell housing, i.e. with the lower bearing top hat inside the gap where the release arm fits. Again, I agree with a long bolt dropped in from the top between the two bearings and arm (or a long screwdriver if the pin falls out as a temporary fix. 

Again, for the O/D flushing out the filter and correct oil. Given the engine condition and previous owners you could have engine oil in the box instead of EP90 fit for yellow bearings.

[Banksy82]

Thanks all, I guess I am at least opening up for an inspection… 

It may be worth pointing out that the whine is only noticeable when stationary and in neutral. (Clutch out) Goes away with clutch in. 

As soon as the car is in motion it either isn’t there or unnoticeable over other general noise.

I’ll open up and have a look. Getting to look at the main shaft tip looks to be straightforward.

Karl