JumpingFrog

In my opinion it's a false economy to reuse those shells. Particularly, if you have poor oil pressure, replacing the shells can only help - you already have the sump off. The ones you've removed definitely aren't original as they are a different material and manufacturer (AE/Glacier Bi-metal instead of Vandervell Tri-metal). If you do replace, King/County Tri-metal might be worth the extra £10 or so. Oil pressure depends on the restriction to the flow, the crank plays a significant role in this. If there is excessive clearance between the journals and bearing shell, there is less restriction so oil pressure is lower. I don't see how removing sludge from the sump is going to improve things much (some sludge is more or less expected at this age).

  I'd say the bearing isn't the original tri-metal type from the colour (too light/shiny) so there is no copper. Looks to be a bi-metal bearing, IMO hard to gauge wear and more prone to damaging the crank. The photo is a little small, so can't tell much. But by the sounds of it a regrind is required long term, new shells might help as a stop-gap measure.

Hi Colin, That'd be great! Have you got any contact details for Bernard? I can't find anything in the Courier for him... 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? 

Thomason and Kipping did two events I think, Paris-Peking in 1997 as well as London-Cape Town in 1998. I can't find many details though, would be interested to learn more. Is 552 HLR on display at the TSSC headquarters? Leon Guyot mentioned it to me, as the Paris Peking car. Other than that, a Herald did the Plymouth-Dakar in 2004 too, http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/somerset/3405731.stm looks like they did pretty well! I wonder if the lighter Herald engine might be an advantage? Strengthening the chassis was something we looked at, but ended up not doing due to various reasons. Weight of spares is the concern, engine spares are rather light but suspension fairly heavy. We've uprated the springs to help a bit, Vitesse at front and Courier van rear. Two spare driveshaft assemblies (both rebuilt) is the plan, as notes from Triumph's Africa proving run mention various failures. I assume the mods to the back plate are cutting another handbrake lever slot in and welding another pull-off spring bracket on? Will look into it... One thing we're working out at the moment is a sump guard, the factory offering looks pretty good as it goes under the anti-roll bar. Don't suppose anyone knows of one? 😉    

I haven’t posted about this on here yet as this project has been a bit of a rollercoaster. Although, I'd like to say thank you for answering my random questions :) . Myself and a friend bought a 1967 Herald 1200 estate that was advertised here in August 2016. The car was in a bit of a state when we got it… Since then we’ve completely rebuilt it (mechanically at least), so it looks a little more complete now. The plan is to drive 16,000 miles to Mongolia. Our route will take us down through Europe, across Turkey and Iran, up through Central Asia and then Russia before finally Mongolia. Hopefully at this point the Herald will still be functioning enough for the final 6,000 miles back across Russia to the UK. We’re doing this as part of the 2018 Mongol Rally. A major part of the rally is raising money for charity, we’re supporting Macmillan and Cool Earth. Any donations gratefully received (everything goes to charity, the trip is self funded): https://uk.virginmoneygiving.com/Team/TriumphandTribulations Don’t suppose anyone has any advice regarding spares/modifications?l. We’ve already made a few changes but nothing drastic. Currently we’re doing shakedown to get some miles on the engine and sort out a few more minor issues (like fuel vaporisation). Cheers, David

Bill/Rarebits has a page on Facebook, I've contacted him a couple of times recently. He still has some stuff, but I'm not sure if he's actively trading. Don't do what we did and buy cheap seals from eBay. These were just a generic 90 degree seal with a bubble/closed cross section. They were way too thick and the doors wouldn't close on them at all. Bad experience returning them too as they'd be cut by this point. In the end we got some from Fitchetts, which fitted perfectly. More expensive, but well worth it after the hassle of the others. These are a 90 degree bubble section too, but of the correct thickness. Admittedly, I'm not sure what the correct/original profile is e.g. whether it's a bubble or the "draught-excluder shape".

Bill/Rarebits has a page on Facebook, I've contacted him a couple of times recently. He still has some stuff, but I'm not sure if he's actively trading. Don't do what we did and buy cheap seals from eBay. These were just a generic 90 degree seal with a bubble/closed cross section. They were way too thick and the doors wouldn't close on them at all. Bad experience returning them too as they'd be cut by this point. In the end we got some from Fitchetts, which fitted perfectly. More expensive, but well worth it after the hassle of the others. These are a 90 degree bubble section too, but of the correct thickness. Admittedly, I'm not sure what the correct/original profile is e.g. whether it's a bubble or the "draught-excluder shape".

Oops, only just seen this. We couldn't budge it - tried shocking it with freezer spray and boiling water. We could see the tank deforming so thought it best to cut our loses. Sent the tank off to be repaired, confirmed that both joints on the cylindrical section were leaking anyway. They repaired (brazed?) the joints and removed the plug (didn't say how!). Just in case someone in the future is tempted to heat the plug up, be warned the filter is plastic. Ours also had a copper washer, but we replaced it with a fibre one, seems to have done the trick. Should be okay as they're used elsewhere for fuel and are more tolerant to rough surfaces than copper.

Thanks for the replies and advice. I'm going to try changing the seal first, I'll keep your suggestions in mind particularly about bracing the tank first. Had another look this weekend, the metal under the paint looks good, so pinholes seem unlikely. However, the bottom of the tank is pushed in (as though its been dropped) around Part No. 13, so I have a bad feeling the brazing has cracked. Worst case is I need to have it brazed/welded I suppose - anyone know of anywhere in the Lancashire/Yorkshire area?

Not sure on power, hasn't moved yet. I think the manifold is more restrictive, the carb is roughly equivalent to a CD150. The CD150 manifold doesn't have the sharp turns that this has. I'm told John Kipping used to favour this manifold bored out for a HS6/HIF44 carb. That was meant to be very similar in performance to twin SU's but with better fuel economy. I'm definitely not aiming for reliability not performance though. Interesting, didn't know you could do that. Makes sense though from a production perspective.

Yes on the fan, the carb is actually a single SU HS4 on a Toledo 1300 manifold.

R/H seems to be correct to me. Edit: Expect some faffing with belt sizes, here's an image of an A127 fitted to our Herald's engine, might help you convince yourself of the mountings.

The banjo fitting doesn't seem to be leaking. The issue seems to be with the fitting that the banjo bolt screws into (part 12), the area of the tank surrounding this is damp with fuel.

What wiring setup are you running? The original dynamo wiring is inadequate for anything beyond standard, the wire is quite thin and will cause a voltage drop due to the resistance as current increases (V=IR). IMO its a good idea to run a short thickish cable from the alternator directly to the starter solenoid, and then use the starter solenoid as a binding post for your relay feeds (to your lights), this should minimise the voltage drop. Apologies if you've already changed this. On the subject of alternators, Lucas A127 style alternators fit (instead of the usual ACR style), these are usually available in higher current outputs.

The part number is 509643, so doesn't correspond to a generic hardware entry (e.g. WFXXX). I'm estimating it's about an inch to an inch and a half in diameter, looks like a big brass nut.  I've bought a pack of assorted imperial fibre washers (up to 2"), so hopefully one of those does the trick. Although I am concerned that it's actually the bottom of the pot that's compromised rather than simply the fibre washer failing. We bought the car disassembled, so everything is an unknown. Perhaps tank sealant might be required.

Managed to put fuel into our estate's tank for the first time (Since 2011) this weekend, but noticed it smelt of petrol. After checking everything over, I noticed it appears to be weeping from the "adaptor assembly" (Part 12). The underside of the "swirl pot" is damp suggesting the sealing washer (Part 13) is leaking? This part is NLA but I'm guessing it's just a massive fibre washer (Parts catalogue says "Washer, sealing on adaptor assembly"). This is similar to the infamous drain plug on the normal Herald tank, so I'm wary to try and undo it... Any ideas what I should do here? I'm thinking I need to remove the "adaptor assembly" to even slosh seal the tank, as it looks like it could easily block up. Thanks - David

I don't think rear disc brakes are worth the effort, the original drums work okay. At least, I've managed to lock the rears in the past... As Andy said, you'd likely need a proportioning valve to maintain the front bias. If you want better braking, it's best to make sure what's there works properly. E.g. rebuilt calipers with fresh pistons and seals. A lot of people on here recommend Mintex M1144 pads as an upgrade. A servo undoubtedly helps too, Canley's (amongst others) do a kit https://www.canleyclassics.com/suspension-steering-and-brakes/brake-servo-kit - but I don't have one myself.

Just fitted an 063 to mine, common size and easy to get. You have to fit it with the posts towards the bulkhead - not an issue, the leads reach fine. I think 075 also fits (wider), but quite a bit more expensive.

Thanks for the replies, being mindful of the fluid level seems a reasonable solution. Doesn't really make sense to me why TRW decided to change the dimensions, even the unbranded ones retain the original dimensions. However, to give me one less thing to worry about, I'll probably change the M/C for an external reservoir type (e.g. https://www.demon-tweeks.co.uk.....loy-master-cylinders), and then mount an external reservoir on the bulkhead. Personally, I prefer a translucent reservoir, particularly for the brakes.

I bought a pair of TRW master cylinders (GMC205, = PNB454?) around a year ago, for a Herald with disc brakes. But I've only just got round to actually fitting them... I also bought a reproduction extension piece. Put these away without thinking, but it turns out the extension doesn't fit. It fits the original (beyond rebuilding) master cylinders, but not the new ones. TRW: ID = 32.5mm OD = 40.8mm Extension: OD of Plastic = 34.6mm ID of metal collar = 44mm Any ideas? Thanks.

I've been trying to source these bearings too, but I'm unable to buy quality ones anywhere. I got sent some NTN ones with a kit, but I'm not entirely convinced these are genuine as NTN's product finder doesn't list RMS8N. One thing I've considered, is buying MJ1 (still quite expensive, all imperial bearings are...), then getting grooves cut in them on a lathe. I've also looked into taper roller bearings too, but couldn't find anything that looked suitable (at least using Timken's bearing finder). There is a similar availability issue for some mini gearboxes, these also use an MJ1 derivative, but these have a step rather than a snap ring...

The Herald/Spitfire version of the trunnionless kit uses the one-piece disc brake vertical link, not the drum brake style one used on the Vittesse/GT6 and early Heralds. But this makes a good point, there are of course Type 12/14 calliper mounts/brackets that fit the drum brake vertical link as used on early disc brake Heralds. This would let you keep your existing callipers - if you can find some.

FYI you can get hardened shafts (Moss), bought one but never fitted it (it's also made by County/XRN). I changed my mind and used a non-hardened one instead... I'd rather replace a softer shaft than have to replace the rocker arms, but this is only a theory I saw on another forum. YMMV, my engine hasn't yet made it into the car 🤔 . Whilst on the subject, make sure you clean out any swarf from inside the shaft (remove the end plug).

Thank you everyone for your advice, I'm less concerned about using a repaired block now. I suppose that's the best explanation. It just seemed odd to me that it still has Stanpart pistons and everything standard size, but I suppose it's more than likely had new rings and shells at some point in its life.

The long straight pipe, no strainer pump is the type I've found fitted to most of the Herald engines I've seen. More than likely the straight pickup with gauze is the type usually fitted to later 1500 engines, they do fit... But be careful as for me the pump body fouled slightly on the block (preventing the pump from seating), only a few strokes of a file to fix though. The 1500 oil pump also has a bigger rotor (as pictured). I'm pretty sure the angled pipe was initially fitted but later switched over to the straight pipe pump, the angled pipe perhaps has issues with starvation on long descents? The reproduction pump bodies aren't meant to be the best in terms of tolerance. I've seen it mentioned somewhere that buying new rotor kits (only available for the 1500 oil pump AFAIK) and fitting to an old body can give better tolerances... The 1500 pumps usually have alloy bodies, which coupled with a steel rotor will increase the clearance when hot, reducing oil pressure, so clearances on the low side are recommended.