Adrian Girling

Many thanks Nick, I'm learning from your knowledge and experience. Checking the rotor dimensions it does look like the rotor arm arc is easily big enough to make good contact with the cap HT contacts over these angles with a locked distributor - looked marginal until I remembered, it only has to cope with half the advance angle. Although I'm also considering using a wasted spark coil pack with built in driver which is relatively inexpensive and electronically easy to implement. Can't think of a reason why not, but I'm ready to be shot down on this....

Many thanks, I've downloaded these chassis details and I'll go look for the link to download the manual

Thanks, very useful. I'd really like to get hold of a proper workshop manual for the 13/60 if they are available anywhere? My Haynes manual is quite good, certainly far better than the ones they publish for more recent cars, but no substitute for the proper one

Thanks Nick, interesting table. Doesn't include the Herald but the range is probably something similar. And googling has taught me that modern fuels need different curves so the standard distributor may be seriously sub-optimal and your point about 3D systems expresses my general thoughts nicely. Getting it to work may not too difficult, but fine tuning will likely need a rolling road dynamometer.

I'm considering building my own electronic ignition using hall sensors which is fairly simple but I'm wondering about using a MAP sensor and RPM to advance the ignition electronically rather than the original vaccum and inertia approach. A throttle position sensor could provide additional data and bring the spark timing near the optimal achieved by modern ECUs Does anyone know where I can find the advance/retard data for the original distributor? The stationary advance is 9 degrees. By locking the mechanical advance my concern is that the rotor arm contact angle may not be sufficient to accommodate the required range. Thought I'd mention, for anyone thinking this is crazy, maybe it is, but I always like to challenge the conventional. I know there are perfectly good solutions available in the market, and there is not much wrong with the standard distributor.

Got one (plus other body parts) - I've sent a private message

If I had room in my shed I'd probably buy: https://www.mathewsons.co.uk/auction/lot/lot-134---1972-triumph-stag/?lot=6338&so=0&st=&sto=0&au=22&ef=&et=&ic=False&sd=0&pp=96&pn=1&g=1 Didn't sell in the June auction, available to buy until next auction (15th July), estimate £6,500 to £7,500 - if I live close I'd take a look... Looks like it's been converted to the Rover V8 engine

Thinking of putting on Ebay, but if anyone local to me (Egham) is interested, I'd rather avoid the hassle. Pictures taken this morning, it's a proper hood, not vinyl, frame is broken where it joins at the front but I could probably fix myself and clean the whole thing up before going down the Ebay route. I can certainly clarify and take more photos if someone thinks it's worth coming from afar. Also, I'd welcome suggestions on pricing - I can't find similar online except at silly prices. In my view, this item is well worth cleaning up and repairing.

Fair comment Spider, I did look at that. Several reasons why not. It has a wider track width, not by a lot, but enough to make it difficult. Bigger engine - with my lighter body the Herald engine will give more than enough power. And the nose of the replica slopes down from about the front axle (vertical plane) which means I need to move the engine back about 110mm and by extending the chassis by 90mm just behind the rear lower wishbone I will effectively position the engine far enough back to squeeze in a radiator. I was reasonably confident in advance that the engine in the Herald can be moved backwards as the two litre six cylinder can squeeze into the Vitesse. Finally, I think the Reliant is a rarer beast, so they are significantly more expensive to buy. The Herald I bought is good for me as the chassis is in great shape, and the body not so good, so it wasn't too expensive! But I can tell you, the guy who sold me the body shell has actually used a Reliant to build a similar but wider and longer car with alumunium bodywork for a friend who is about 6ft 3in tall and can't fit in the seriously narrow original car.

The 13/60 convertible I'm using as a donor was mostly in bits before I got it - one door off, the other on hinges but little else. I have boxes full of bits, many I don't know what they are for. If you can get a photo from someone, I'll have a look in case I have them

Similar to a Mini Moke. Thinking about it, not a huge task to convert a Herald rag top by removing the doors and welding a fabricated structure above the sills to provide rigidity...

Paul, that is so much better than the table I found - lots of useful information including geometry to give the wheel rate. Presumably the Herald geometry is similar if not the same, so eventually I should be able to do the maths, including the effect of taking out the top leaf/leaves of the rear transverse spring. Cheeeers Adrian P.S. I wonder if a page on this site with "useful links" would garner favour?

Thanks Clive. I believe I found a table of free lengths and installed lengths of spitfire springs somewhere, can't find it again right now - but as you say, better to get the whole car finished with known weight on each wheel and then do the maths.

Nice 👍

Thanks, I'll investigate further. Leaving as is for now, as suggested by "standardthread", may be the wisest move - if everything else is in place I'll be in a better position to work out exactly what's needed.

Probably right, it's not urgent, although I'm about to take the whole front suspension off the car in preparation for lengthening the chassis by 90mm so I thought I'd try to kill two birds with with one stone

With the body off, to be replaced by a much lighter GRP bodyshell (for my replica 1936 BMW328 posted elsewhere), my Triumph 13/60 sits much higher off the ground, with positive camber back and front. At the back, I understand I can use a rear spring lowering block to achieve less positive camber and possibly remove leaves of the spring as the lower sprung weight would benefit from a softer spring. Thoughts on this also welcome. But if I go for shorter front springs they will probably be stiffer which, for the lower sprung weight, is not ideal. When the time comes I may even try to do some maths on this, but my question is really, where should I go to get shorter softer springs without spending a fortune? There may even be standard springs from another vehicle which would do the job and using a spacer with a spring which is too short would probably be okay.

Successfully installed the Rimmer Bros Alternator kit using a 1050 mm fan belt in place of the 1063 mm belt sent with the kit, which was too long. Belt is "Medway" AVX 10X1050La "OIL AND HERT(sic) RESISTANT". Managed to drill out and tap the corroded hole where the bracket is bolted to the cylinder head. Used an M10 1.0 bolt. Can give full details if anyone interested. Pulley diameters (roughly) 4 1/8 fan, 4 5/8 crank, 2 1/2 alternator - difficult to measure accurately as I didn't have calipers with me - I'd be interested to learn if these are the standard pulleys and what other diameters are available?

Sorry to hear that. Words fail me. How about: https://www.oxtedclassiccars.co.uk/our-fleet/triumph-spitfire-mk2-1965.html Weekend price of £850 is more than it cost to buy new!

Indeed it did, but just mild amusement 🙂

Dale, thanks for all the info - for now I'll probably stick with the standard set up and see how it goes but you've answered another a question I wanted to ask - what brake fluid to use. When I was a graduate apprentice with AP/Lockheed fifty years ago I learned that the ingredients of brake fluid and margarine were virtually the same except for the water content. I've always insisted on butter My most likely need to make a change will be to have the smallest bore rear brake cylinders and larger front pads to compensate for the overall reduction in weight with the CG moving forward due to engine weight.

Thanks Nick, I was writing my reply as your post appeared - All good advice, hopefully useful to others at some time.

Thanks Rob, fair point. I'm not a fan of front/rear split either - if the front fails and the back locks... As luck would having, trawling through the boxes that came with the car I discovered the attached. So I'm back to sticking with the original single circuit. Only serious bit missing is the rod with circlips which is the pivot point for the clutch pedal.

I've previously posted about my project to use a Herald 13/60 chassis to build a replica of a 1936 BMW328 sports car. I've got a good chassis and drivetrain, but the brake and clutch master cylinders are missing as well as the foot pedals. So I'm thinking of converting to dual circuit, diagonal. Has anyone done this? From the drawing in the handbook it's clear from the pedal that it has a high mechanical advantage to allow the front disc calipers to work without a servo and the rear drum slave cylinders are are fairly small diameter to allow them to balance with the calipers in the single circuit. I'm wondering, does anyone have the bore diameter of the brake master cylinder and the dimensions of the foot pedal (length and pivot point to work out mechanical advantage) Grateful for any insights and/or advice!

That tracks with 1.0 pitch needing a 9.1mm drill bit - can't recall where I found this. Thanks also for the pulley/bracket suggestions - somewhere to go if the change in fan belt length is not adequate.