Hughbert

I managed to get some Triumph BL OEM thrust washers last year still in the BL boxes still wrapped and they were  a white metal alloy type so did they do two types as the supplier above states his are superior which is a big claim and that the Triumph ones were only plated steel. So how did I buy OEM Triumph white metal alloy ones :-/ and have seen others for sale too stating white metal alloy?

I guess you did get you oil mixed up JohnD and I am sure you meant to say putting Diesel Fuel oil in your engine and running it would be lunacy whereas filling your engine which has stood for 15 years with the same Diesel Fuel oil and turning it over by hand for a week or so then draining it out. Then removing the sump and using clean diesel fuel oil to flush the engine once again allowing it to drain out for some time than refilling with engine oil is not lunacy but a sensible way to clean all the crap out of the engine.

Good idea to remove the shocks and strip off all the old body coating on the mounts and wheel arch around where the mounts are you will then have a good idea what wants repairing/replacing/plating/welding ;) Photo 2 shows signs of quite bad corrosion between panels I would think it wants sorting out :-/

796 wrote:After ye grind the rockers doon, they will be better than a new,n. reason is the metal behint the indent, has now been compressed / work hardened. so is actually stiffer / tuffer than the OE stuff. the OE case hardening is still there, its just the case hardened bit, has actually pushed / sqasshed the underlying soft metal into its sell, thus forming an indent, and also mek,n the underlying metal much stiffer noo. that is, IF the rocker face has no disintegrated.. So re face, and they better than OE. { there is a stuff oot called Casenite,  but needs to be red hot , then dip,roll the stuff into it Or, bung all rockers into a sealed container, cover with the stuff, and bake for a few hours at v v high temp, to get the gasses into the metal pores.  but its hard work.} Some intresting reading in here. so read,ndigest. ;) http://academic.uprm.edu/pcaceres/Courses/MechMet/MET-6A.pdf M Other processes to consider http://www.tstcoatings.com/wear_resistant_coatings.html http://www.amphardchrome.co.uk/metal-spraying.php http://www.tstcoatings.com/hard_chrome_replacement.html http://www.mbicoatings.com/content.cfm/Coatings/THERMAL-SPRAY-COATINGS/category_id/102/page_id/171

When I first got my car which had stood 8 years or so I poured red diesel into the engine oil filler then each day turned it over by hand for 10 mins I did this for two weeks then I drained the oil/diesel out. I then refilled it again with diesel and did one more week of turning over by hand then drained it again I then removed the sump and the old oil filter then let the engine stand a week or so to drain out . Put a new oil filter on filled it with engine oil and ran it when I took the top engine cover off the rockers etc were spotless clean and shiny . As the car had only covered 64750 miles from new and was in great condition with good oil pressure I decided not to rebuild  it just restore the repainted it and used it for 2 years no problems in fact when Royboy and I removed it to rebuild to a TR6 2500 with a fast road cam the internals of the engine were shiny and clean no coke of gunk just lovely and clean.  :)

2726 wrote:Hi John Pleased that the information might help. Corrosion through the damper mounts was the main reason I took my GT6 off the road in the early 1990s (well that a crippling mortgage in the heady days of 14% interest). When we carried out the restoration a couple of years ago I was amazed how much damage had been done as the corrosion had penetrated the inner arches and had got right down into the floors. Triumph designed the chassis for the dampers to mount in the original position, which seems pretty robust as it is properly triangulated and we assume only introduced the arch mount in order to clear the Rotaflex. Remember the Mk2 set up was in response to criticism of the Mk1 swing axle and its tendency to frighten American  journalists. The problem is the multiple layers of metal fixed together with spot welds, leaving lots of edges for the corrosion to get in. Mind you and it has been said many times before, Triumph weren't expecting these cars to around 40 years later!    Keep up the good work and the regular posts! Regards Ian F ;) If Triumph thought bolting brackets to the chassis to modify them to avoid the RotoFlex doughnuts was the best way froward they would have done that rather than costly welding. The real reason was to improve handling as explained in an original write up for at the time. Its has always raised discussions i.e.  http://club.triumph.org.uk/cgi-bin/forum10/Blah.pl?m-1230551366/ I for one think the rear end of the car is better for the RotoFlex set up and the transfer from under steer to over steer at the rear feels more compliant progressive less snap over steer and better for the damper mounted to the body. But each car owner to their own with what is their car to do what they like and wish to do with it.   I over came the damper mounting double skin effect by seam welding my mounting plate to the inner arch I suspect that like my GT6 MKIII the spot welded mounting plate was a small contribution to the extensive rust in the inner/outer wings, floor sills, etc the spot welded outer to inner wing joint covered with the chrome strip was a bigger contribution as was the poor drainage around the rear hatch. I just cut the original mounting plates out of the inner wigs and the patch of metal that was part of the inner wing that I separated the bracket from was still in good condition with no thinning of metal on the bracket or the original inner wing. I was able to reuse the original damper mounting brackets they were so good I guess its just down to how well each car has been under sealed or protected by each PO in the past.  ;)

I too have a set of CV driveshafts which use 1500 outer CV joints and an OEM driveshaft/inner lobro joint I did originally fabricate a set from a Nissan GTR/Simca components which are not readily available so I decided to find a very easy to source components and after some research I have found a OEM car source for my latest set. I was able to retain my original rotoflex damper mountings on the body shell which is what a large majority of  monocoque body cars have ie Ford Escort, etc. albeit they have subframes not chassis. John I think the more you can isolate the high bred alloy body your building from chassis vibration the better the chance you have avoiding the high bred alloy body being stressed which can lead to fracturing of the panels, joints, welds, etc. For your car not having the damper mounted to the inner wheel arch will isolate the body further.   The only reason Triumph deleted removed the Rotoflex system from the last GT6 MKIII was to reduce cost though some say weight but Triumph were under huge pressure to retain there small chassis cars models against the pressure from their BL internal rivals such as MG/Austin/Rover and internally the TR7. Costs were being used to make a case to drop competing models within the BL group. I have two cost engineers that worked for me one was a tooling engineer one a cost engineer who worked at Canley then Rover/MG right through to the last days and lost all their pension, etc, to the infamous 4.

I cut the old inner wheel arch damper mounts off my old knackared inner arches and welded them back on the new arches I fitted as I reckon that Triumph did it for a reason one being to control rear body roll. My thoughts were as my the GT6 has a steel roof, pilliars,rear hatch, glass , which makes it more top heavy than a Spifire so it rolls more the dampers mounted to the body help with roll and stabilse the body and rear end and therefore handling.

t No offset required they just bolt in where the shocks on non roto shocks do avioding the rotoflex doughnuts  see photo where shocks are bolted the coversion brackets bolt. I am sure that is right.

or 50 profile tyres?

I have 205/50/15 on the rear of my car and 195/50/15 on the front plus the car is lowered and I have had no problems  ;)

Have you tried jacking the diff up a little spray some WD40 or some other oil then let it drop do it a few times and when jacked up do as others have wrote use a pry bar it will come out. But have a jack under it not you  ;)

5999 wrote:To be honest John (no pun intended), I'm suprised how well it feels considering all the 'horror stories' surrounding the small chassis rear ends. (Unless I'm just not trying hard enough  :-/) I guess you would say it's had 'major mods' to accomodate the wheels and tyres ;) And a slightly long shot example of cornering. If you know Prescott, you'll know the camber change on that corner ;) Wow nice car great to see someone with another take on a modified Vitesse too ;)

I hope your okay with this and I am sure you already know but just make sure you remove any oil or paint from a round the local area of the pan and make sure you have the car up high to allow you lots of movement space before you put a naked flame under your car. Oh and have an extinguisher nearby to hand even a mate with you  ;) You could try the stuff plumbers use to freeze pipes to freeze the plug I have used it in the past to shrink bolts, etc to remove them I wore a pair of welders gloves to protect my hands when spraying the bolt.

On my GT6 I have 600lbs springs with adjustable Spaxs and a 1inch ARB fitted on the front with a 3/4 inch lowering block on the rear with gas shocks plus 15inch wheels with 205/50 on the rear and 195/50 on the front. The car is a wee bit pointy but I prefer my car not to under steer I am happy with the way it handles. I did have to put 5mm wheel spacers on the rear and front to get the right offset which prevents the wheels rubbing slightly on the various suspension bits. I have no problems with the tires rubbing on any part of the wheel arches.  

796 wrote:Why cant you lot talk in English. bluddeee KGs, its LBS. :P M ;D ;D Its still got 300 bhp  ;) which is what my last car a Audi TTS Quattro S Tronic the weight 1,830 kg but what matters is it has a Max torque 350 Nm @ 2500 rpm had which could eat Ford Focus ST and the Volvo V40 and the BMW 330 for dinner it was mad bonkers mad. So this GT6  will be blooming quick no matter what anyone thinks  ;)

1903 wrote:Agreed, it's not important It'd be nice to know its power-to-weight though I'd like to see it do a few runs whilst hooked up to a vbox Bet it's pretty quick I agree it would be nice to know and I wouldn't mind being in it when it did those vbox runs either  :)

Who really cares if it is or is not 700 kg come on lets not get stuck on it hey how are we ever going to know :-/ heres your hat back the weather forecast is for rain over the weekend ;)  :)

2402 wrote:The wife and i lifted the tub easy. I felt it was about the same weight as the spitfire tub. We will see what my car weighs in at next month. fingers crossed it passes the mot. Chris. Yeah but thats cheating mate you count as two of us mere normal chaps or three small build chaps so its a two man one wife job  ;) ;) :)

1078 wrote:He's already done loads of re-earthing, but not all the way to the front yet. It may be worth undoing the nuts that hold the light units to the body and look to see if they and the area on the body the bolts and nuts contact the body are clean and free from rust you should mark and make a diagram of where each wire connects before total removing the light units. It sure makes life easy when refitting them a lesson I had to learn the hard way !!! ha ha

1078 wrote:Thanks, guys, I'll tell him.  Night time dimmer??  Never heard of that. Also, the left side light goes out when you hit the brake lights, which are also a bit dull. sixlover Try taking off each connector one at a time and clean and check the condition of each one plus the connector fitting on the light unit too. Quick to do and may be the root cause.  

I ran an earth wire from the front of the car to the rear and then earthed each separate rear light to that earth on my car the rear lights are now very bright. Some might say thats overkill but I needed to do that as I was always intended to fit a Pi system anyway. It still improved my rear lights brightness though ;)

Hi Chris I would think the chaps at Yorkshire Triumph would have a good idea too I would be surprised if any T6 was less than 700kg too with the big diameter roll over frame and the form of fibreglass used in its body tub is quite a heavy type as it looks to be laid up by hand. There are much lighter forms of fibreglass like short strand or long strand both applied to the mould in thin layers by a gun type process manual or automatically. It also depends if any talc powder has been used in the TG fibreglass to make it lighter but it looks to be a good strong tub with plenty of steel insets and a good thickness of fibreglass which is not the lightest material now days. Thats a good thing for you and all T6 owners as it will be a reasonably stiff tube. One thought how few normal size strength people would it take to lift a stripped out bare GT6 tub and a bare T6 tub both tubs being painted ready to bolt to a chassis no glass fitted. :-/

But really  all that matters is torque plus the power to weight ratio it weighs 700kg and has 300bhp thats 234kg per 100bhp I think  ::) :-/which is pretty good  ;) Who cares if its not the lightest GT6 in the world when you have 300 bhp and you weigh 700 kg  :) Also there are so many ways to do a GT6 I for one would not want one cut down the middle then widened then have a piece welded in to the gap blimey a big wide GT6 which has all its strength lost.  Why would you do that just buy a Stag and put a hard top on it.

Who would have thought it all those years ago when the GT6 was launched that one day people would still be modifying them even driving them in standard or mild mods form in 2013 I am sure a lot of the original design and engineers who worked on all three Marks would get a kick out of knowing that or seeing that if any are still around today and that it just a great thing really  :)