sparky_spit

It's true what you say Tony.  The only thing I'd say for "everyday" use of a 4 cylinder Triumph is that the 1500 in particular can be prone to additional wear caused by overheated oil when its taken outside of what would normally be called "everyday" use, such as high sustained speeds during the RBRR or 10CR for example. That's when some form of oil temperature management can be useful in a non-racing engine. Over on the Sideways forum there is a very long thread by "oldtuckunder" regarding oil temperatures (and the lack of it during idling, warming up and initial use) on a 6 cylinder Triumph engine use in a sprint/hill-climb car. It's a very interesting story and there are some excellent mods described to overcome a particular issue. It's well worth reading just for the information.  My old 1500 Spitfire had a cooler with no thermostat fitted. God knows how cold the oil in that was most of the time. I'm glad I know better now.

A flippant answer might be that you are not driving it fast enough.....😆 Or, for a quick rough check on whether the oil cooler is actually in circuit all of the time and not being bypassed by the thermostat, is to wrap it in some form of insulation.  A bit of bubble wrap and a plastic bag taped round it would last long enough for you to give it blast and see what temperature you get up to with it completely insulated.

I more or less did exactly what you have done, Stuart, about 10 years ago when I tarted up my Mk3 Spitfire.  It looked pretty good and did so for some years, but an increasing number of stone chips in the lacquer oxidised the exposed alloy spot and it gradually got worse and worse. If you can keep on top of touching-in the stone-chips you'll be okay. I didn't, and eventually flatted off the remaining lacquer and then used Auto-Solvol to polish it up every once in a while.

Yes, exactly as Clifty says. They are very good and give virtually 100% confidence that you are not going to unexpectedly lose a front wheel due to trunnion failure.

Another aspect to the "MOT or not?" question is which is better long term?  Assuming your car is eligible to be MOT exempt and you can choose whether to still have an official MOT,  or a MOT style check (or nothing at all); which is the better long term strategy? Do you MOT it and face increasingly more stringent test criteria which makes it more and more difficult for our cars to pass as time goes on? Or always keep it as a VHI and possibly face future usage restrictions and other goverment imposed restrictions further down the line?

Just checking I've got this right before ploughing ahead....  I've got the camshaft (Mk3 grind) fitted to the block, along with the crankshaft and front plate/keeper etc.  I'm not ready to put the head and valve gear on yet but want to fit the cam chain and timing cover. I want to use the equal overlap method but obviously have no valves/rockers to set, measure or watch, and can't set 40thou and measure equal gaps, etc.  I've identified and marked TDC for the crank on No1 cyl. I've also put a cam follower in place for both inlet and exhaust for No 4 cyl. Using a dial gauge on a magnetic stand I can check the cam lift via the followers for No 4 cyl. When both of these are on the rock and are of equal height I'm assuming this is the correct point at which to time the cam into the crank at No 1 cyl TDC. I've tried it and the dots/scribed lines on the sprockets and front plate do line up, although I wasn't going to rely on these as it's a reground cam. I think this is correct, and I'm doing exactly the same thing as using the rockers (but in a slightly different way) and just wanted to check it's correct before going any further. 

I admire your approach Laurence. Let's hope you do not become wrong twice before 🙂. Regarding hog rings. These bite when trying to re-fit them.  They obviously remember the first time someone grabbed them with pliers when fitting them and have learned not to get caught out a second time. I used black cable ties, as recommended by Owen at the seat cover place I can never remember the name of. Fit them so the sharp bit stays inboard and they are virtually invisible and are plenty strong enough.

Current Standings as of 13th August: Colin Wake - 57pts plus one marshaling point Mark Rutter - 49pts Mike Banks - 33pts plus one marshaling point Charlie Deards - 29pts Ellis Stokes - 29pts Michael Helm - 26pts Dale Barker - 16pts plus one marshalling point Mike Bishop - 15pts Phil Stanley - 12pts Nigel Abdullha - one marshalling point The next event in this series is the Chelmsford Motor Club's Priestley Rally on the 28th September.

It must be a "feature" of Spitfires that the nearside one just pulls out but the driver's side stays stuck in its channel, as mine is exactly the same!  However, as you say, it's not supposed to be like that. Like mine, your nearside window channel rubber has probably disintegrated and the glass is just held in place in the metal U channel by gravity. Take off the door card and wind the window down as far as it will go. You now need to take off the inner and outer sealing strips by taking off the trim clips. Easily said but more difficult to do. The gap in the top of the door is now wide enough to get the glass (and its metal/rubber U channel) up and out.  You need to undo the bolts that hold it in place first of course. You can see these inside the door. Replace the glass using new U channel rubbers if your's are knackered. Then reassemble in reverse order as above. The fun part is getting the sealing strip clips back on.  There's another thread on the forum from a few weeks ago that details that - see here [Sorry, link no longer available].  Good luck!

It must be a "feature" of Spitfires that the nearside one just pulls out but the driver's side stays stuck in its channel, as mine is exactly the same!  However, as you say, it's not supposed to be like that. Like mine, your nearside window channel rubber has probably disintegrated and the glass is just held in place in the metal U channel by gravity. Take off the door card and wind the window down as far as it will go. You now need to take off the inner and outer sealing strips by taking off the trim clips. Easily said but more difficult to do. The gap in the top of the door is now wide enough to get the glass (and its metal/rubber U channel) up and out.  You need to undo the bolts that hold it in place first of course. You can see these inside the door. Replace the glass using new U channel rubbers if your's are knackered. Then reassemble in reverse order as above. The fun part is getting the sealing strip clips back on.  There's another thread on the forum from a few weeks ago that details that - see here [Sorry, link no longer available].  Good luck!

There's a bloke called Andy (can't recall his surname at present) who machines the carb body and inserts rubber shielded ball races in place of the plain bushes. He did mine some years ago and it's more or less a lifetime fix. If no one comes up with his name, I can get it from Mike Charlton (Velocita Rosso on here). It wasn't expensive.

Yes, you're right Nick; I'm probably overthinking it. It would be easier to do just that each year. If you went through declaring it as radically altered you'd have to have it MOT'd anyway, so you might as well just MOT it and not bother about the declaration. You'd get the same result with less hassle.

Well that's good news then. It means that the FBHVC advice in the mag is out of dàte already. It does raise the question of how a 40+ year old radically altered car owner declares it as such?

Ted - Yes, taxing a 40+ year old car online is a doddle. What did you do about MOT exemption?

Not yet there isn't Don, because you probably still have a current MOT like me. But in the subsequent year (and years) of applying for tax after May 2018, and assuming you allow your MOT to lapse in the meantime, the next time you tax your car two tick-boxes will be displayed on the online form. One is for "Exempt" and the other for "Not Exempt" (for radically altered cars over 40 years old).  The boxes will not appear if the system sees that you have a current MOT. See the top half of page 77 in the latest July 2018 club mag, which explains this, the bit under "Licensing System Operation". This assumes, of course, that the DVLA don't make another change to the process in the meantime.

I must have bought the one that you sold Danny!! Mine took many hours to get it to fit as badly as it does.  Front to rear dimensions are not too bad, but the the wing rear vertical edges needed building up with GRP as they were not even at 90 degrees to the bottoms. They are such that you need large gaps to the front of the doors otherwise they catch when the door opens.  Also, as Danny says, the width at the rear is all wrong and the splay is difficult to control without resorting to additional bracing. It was a nightmare. I've persisted with mine as it's very light and my old steel one was really rotten. It looks okay in the dark with your eyes half closed.....

Thanks Kim-Jong.  Yes, that ties in exactly with how I understand it now.  Both our cars will remain in the Historic class for taxation purposes, and will be VHI (Vehicle of Historic Interest) for MOT exemption purposes, and will remain so as long as we declare VHI via a paper V112 at a Post Office, or via ticking the box on the online form/page each year at the time of taxing the vehicle. 

Hi Graham, I understand that it is just the same as on the TR, you fit the seals once the glass is in, with the window wound down as far as it goes. It has to be done like that as you cannot get the glass and its U channel in with the seals already in place. I've not done it myself (although I will be in the near future) but I'm reliably informed that this is the case.

The new magazine arrived today and pages 76 and 77 have just answered my question.

Rob is right. It's on page 76 of the May 2018 magazine, at the top of the 3rd column. Once a vehicle becomes 40 years old it will default to MOT exempt. Then at the next tax renewal date you either declare VHI or revert to requiring an MOT.

GLANG - Yes, I see what you mean. I do know from other sources that in the the 2nd, 3rd and so on years all you have to do is to tick a box on the online tax page, which confirms that your vehicle is still eligible for MOT exemption. TED - What confuses me is that in the first year (when the guidance notes say you must do it at a Post Office), if the screen that the Post Office bod is looking at already shows my vehicle as being category "r" then there is an assumption that the vehicle is okay for exemption without even first finding out if it is eligible or not. The bloke didn't even ask to see my V112. At that point in the process nobody knows if it's a "standard" car, or if it is radically altered, except me. It would be interesting to hear the experience of somebody else who has actually done it at a Post Office and see what happened to them.

This morning I went to my local Post Office to tax my Spitfire.  I also had a filled in V112 that I printed off the GOV.UK website so I could declare the car as a VHI.  All went swimmingly until they handed me back my V112 without looking at it.  I thought they were supposed to send this to DVLA. A long discussion took place; much searching of their computer system, and their insistence that although they had not done one of these before, everything was fine and would be okay. They did eventually agree to put my V112 into the weekly post pouch to the DVLA. I'm unconvinced. My understanding is that the first declaration of VHI must be done via the paper version V112 at a Post Office, and then subsequent years can be done online or by paper. If the V112 does not get sent to DVLA by the Post Office how do DVLA know that you made the declaration? Has anybody done similar, and what was your experience?

Yes, but not by much. I had to make the top hat flanges thinner by rubbing them down on some abrasive paper on a flat surface. I used the better quality green sandpaper you can buy. It took a while, testing them frequently so I didn't go too far. I've now gone trunnionless so not an issue for me now.

I've had top hat bushes where the "rim" is too thick, effectively making the tube too short to be clamped tight to allow the required rotary movement.

Thanks for the information. My original plan was to take backplates and leave the hub loose until required then attach the backplate for the side required. Depends on the chance of lightning striking twice I suppose?  That is such a simple and effective idea.  Why didn't I think of that?... especially as my hub nut is only done up finger tight anyway on the spare shaft, with the plan being to torque it up once fitted to the car.  I'm sure I overthink things sometimes....