RobPearce
-
Posts
2,176 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
20
Content Type
Forums
Blogs
Events
Downloads
Gallery
Membership & Shop
Everything posted by RobPearce
-
piman wrote: There is not the same thing with a crank. No, but there are related effects. The Rover K-series engine with the huge long head bolts was line-bored with bolts under torque, because the distortion of the bearing cage meant the crank didn't rotate properly otherwise. However, this won't usually affect people like us because it's always the crank itself, not the block, that gets machined when rebuilding.
-
One note to add - you can swap the flanges because the yokes are the same, but you can also fit the later Herald / early Spitfire small flange stub shafts into a late Spitfire diff, to go the other way. That's what Toby had (briefly) having inherited it from Henrietta Herald (1500 in a 13/60) before the years dumped at the back of a wet barn took their toll and required a recon diff. The early Herald diffs had smaller shafts, though.
-
I'm nearing the end of rebuilding a pair of HS4s (and doing a non-waxstat conversion on them). It's taken me ages but there are two reasons for that: 1) I went overboard and blast cleaned then polished the outside of various bits 2) I spent no time on it, constantly being distracted by all the much bigger things that car needs doing I got the kits years back so can't remember where. It's a fairly simple job - just remember two things: 1) keep it all spotlessly clean (cleaning up the muck is the most important part of the job) 2) make a careful note of how it comes apart so that you can put it back together the same.
-
That looks like a late Stromberg 150CD. It's not the right one for a Herald 13/60 but it's quite similar. The big differences are: - the white plastic capped long doofer on the side. This is a thermostatic correction valve, similar to the waxstat on late SUs. - the nasty late Stromberg tuning method requiring a special tool inserted down the dashpot damper hole (and likely to rip your diaphragms if misused) - possibly (though I can't quite see from your photos) a weird circular enrichment valve for the choke These carbs were fitted to a lot of cars in the early '70s, including Mk3 GT6s (where there is a pair, only one of which has the choke unit, the other relying on a balance pipe).
-
I may be a bit slow but I'm worried that you seem to have chosen to rely solely on the driver's attention and judgement for your engine cooling. If not, then the switch-controlled fan must be only one of two, in which case it's fighting the other one and my comments all still apply. Plus you're making your life hard, requiring you to do a job that a crude mechanical sensor would do far better. Still a stupid idea, sorry.
-
4187 wrote:The fan works in either direction by just changing the live and earth terminals over on the motor so it is a two minute job to do. Not true. See other replies. 4187 wrote:My thoughts were thoughts were to suck air out as it only overheats when stood, never when on the move to keep the cabin a bit cooler, surely even if the air is hot that is being drawn through the radiator it will still cool it sufficiently to stop it overheating as the hot air will still be cooler than the boiling water? It sounds like you're intending to have the fan draw air from the engine bay and blow it out the front, in opposition to the natural flow while driving. Is that right? You said something about the fan only running while stationary, which isn't true even as a generalisation, but think about this: - You're in heavy traffic, stationary. The engine gets hot and the fan cuts in to cool it. - The traffic then clears (or you reach your turning) and you accelerate away. - At this point, the engine IS STILL HOT, so the FAN IS STILL RUNNING. What you have now is a fan desperately fighting against the natural flow of the air. The result of that is that practically no air is flowing at all. And so the engine is not being cooled and it overheats, causing serious mechanical failure and a huge bill.
-
Others have said about the Haynes being more newbie-friendly than the BL one, but you definitely need the latter as well. The Haynes one is just too full of errors (and no, Wim, that's not just your English, the BL one is actually sometimes more understandable).
-
What they said :) The reason you can't use the coil positive is that the red wire is a supply feed to the (probably rather minimal) electronics. It will work on low voltage (otherwise it would prevent you starting a cold engine on a weak battery) but it may dislike a very variable voltage. The positive side of a ballasted coil is not at 6V. It's at 12V when the contacts are open, then drops as the current in the coil builds up, possibly to less than 6V in fact, then when the contacts open again it jumps all over the place (coil trying to conduct into a nearly open circuit, just a condenser present) before settling back to 12V. And this is happening hundreds of times a second, so if the electronics isn't designed to cope with that it'll get upset.
-
Aaargh!! Tessa's new block isn't the same as the old one! Damn fool that I am I'd assumed it would be, but the replacement is post-4500 (5615, in fact) whereas the one I took out is pre-1000! So I can't re-use the crankshaft. Anybody here got a spare late Mk1 2L crankshaft?
-
My Vitesse has 2-door Toledo front seats. I don't think any modifications were needed but the seats have to be swapped over (passenger seat on driver's side &vv)
-
I'm not saying anything about different engines not being different, nor am I saying the original curve is "valueless". I think we're probably not really in disagreement. It's merely that you're fixated on not throwing out the baseline and it came across as "you don't need to change it", whereas I'm saying that if you need to change the base advance for any reason then you should consider the effects on the curves too. A fuel that burns fast enough to shift the idle advance from, say, 10BTDC to 6BTDC will almost certainly need the 40BTDC at higher speed to become less than 36BTDC - 25BTDC would be a more likely value.
-
OK, but if you agree that it will affect the advance, why did you say Quote:I don't think the curve will be affected greatly? If the fuel is affecting the burn rate (time) then it's definitely going to have a different amount of effect on advance (angle) at higher RPM than it does at idle.
-
Alec, Nothing in what I wrote could possibly suggest I wasn't fully aware that the combustion chamber design is ALSO a very major factor. You seemed to think it was the only one, and that the fuel made no difference. If so, you were mistaken. Rob
-
I'd agree, the servo is not in the loop in that photo. You can clearly see the two holes where the pipes ought to attach. My guess is that somebody had trouble with the servo and decided to bypass it, but without a 2-way female union to hand, they had to use a 3-way and plug the third with... well a bleed nipple is one of the more obvious candidates.
-
10362 wrote:On the Daimler Dart Car SOS did they also wanted a lighter clutch and on that they swapped out the pressure assembly which had coil springs for one using a diaphragm spring. It surprised me that it would have made any difference. Surely the spring pressure would need to be the same. It makes quite a difference. The coil spring clutch is linear - the further you compress the springs, the more force it takes. The clutch engaged condition, where the pressure is required to transmit torque, is with the springs minimally compressed. Thus you need to apply more force to disengage the clutch - and hold it disengaged - than is needed to clamp it. The diaphragm spring is an "up-and-over" device. Once you've pressed it past the knee point, the force required to push it further - and hold it there - is far less.
-
piman wrote:I don't think the curve will be affected greatly by the fuel as that is determined by the internal combustion characteristics of the engine, although it may be advanced or retarded due to the fuel? The characteristics of the fuel make a HUGE difference! It's the fuel that is burning so of course the characteristics of the fuel make a big difference to the speed of burn, and to how much that's affected by in-cylinder pressure. These are the fundamental governing factors of ignition advance - not just the static value but the slope of all the adjustments (mechanical and vacuum advance).
-
The complicated linkage is designed to provide slower throttle opening at light throttle (where small changes make a big difference) but swing the butterfly open quickly as the pedal is pressed further down (when small throttle changes make no difference). This is a Good Thing and nearly all modern cars do it one way or another (often by having Very Complicated Mathematics in the ECU to decide upon the throttle target). The cam-and-roller method on the 2500S isn't the best. It has a very noticeable knee point between the slopes, which feels like the end of pedal travel to a driver more accustomed to a Mk2 Spitfire. However, it does give better throttle control / linearity than "a piece of Meccano or Dexion with a single arm".
-
The pipe runs very close to the rocker cover, where it's not likely to be hit by things low down. So when you crash into a bollard or a 4x4 bumper or such, the chassis and front pulley take the impact, pushing the engine back without getting near the fuel pipe. With the fuel pipe at the back, sandwiched between the engine and the bulkhead, it's a lot more vulnerable to that sort of crash. That said, Dolomites had the fuel pipe run round the back of the head, but of course the hole in the bulkhead is rather bigger on them.
-
I'm pretty sure the smallest lucars are what the brothers' cable has
-
piman is right about the air. Even if the centrifugal force tries to remove oil from the oilways, the air pressure available to replace it with anything undesirable is less than 15 psi, which at high revs should not compete with the oil pump at all.
-
1344 wrote: Any joy ? No, sorry. That doesn't mean I defintiely don't have one, just that it's not in any of the places I'd expect to have put it.
-
There appear to be a number of different fitments for both the reverse light and O/D inhibitor switches. My first Vitesse had both mounted on a bracket at the front of the remote, with levers sticking out both sides to operate them (the reverse lever only pointed one way, the O/D one had a longer actuator). My GT6 also has the bracket but it's only for the O/D switch, with a slotted hub thing to operate it. The reverse light switch is on the gearbox top plate. I can't remember what the setup is on Tessa, despite having recently exposed it for the engine removal!
-
1344 wrote: That would be good. Go look now ! I'll send money ;) I'm at work right now :P;) but I'll look this evening.
-
Hazards by the battery, indicators behind the dash. They are different because of current rating (hazards is twice as many bulbs) and the effect of this on the speed of flashing.
-
Let me have a dig in the bag of old bits. We dismantled a 2500S (actually a 2000Mk1 but on S running gear) many years back and I've quite possibly still got that bit.
