Nick Jones

Pretty much agree with the above. Unless your shell is particularly rough you will be unlikely to gain much bu buying another unless you are very lucky. One important point - when repairing a shell/tub it should be properly fitted to the chassis and you need the doors to hand as well. If you have a hardtop, this should also be fitted. All this is to ensure that the shell ends up the correct shape after welding and your doors still fit properly. Bear in mind that if it is very rusty it may have already changed shape and you might actually have to take steps to move it back to where it should be. Here's one we did a few years back. This tub could possibly have been a candidate for replacement but he wanted a project (and got one!) and it had almost not previous repairs which is is usually a good thing and unpicking crappy previous repairs is no fun....... http://sideways-technologies.co.uk/forums/index.php?/topic/7107-chriss-mkiv-basket-case-restored-to-glory/ If yours is rustier than this was....... then you might find a better one! Nick

Well, interesting idea and I follow your chain of logic. However, I question your assertion that the dashpot piston really causes a significant obstruction to airflow. Point being that the airflow rate through the carbs is related mostly to rpm. At wide open throttle (WOT) a 2L engine "pumps" 1L of air every revolution. At 6000 rpm that is 6000 l/min or 100l/s. We know that the carb is capable of that much in standard calibration and that the piston is pretty much at the top of it's travel at that point. The original factory calibration is good (as you would hope) and the CD150 is a good size match for the Triumph 2L . At 3000 rpm you halve the airflow requirement to 3000 l/min (50 l/s), so the piston needs to be no more than half way up. In the same way, the last "half" of the throttle opening brings no benefit as the engine can already draw all the air it wants. The other side to this is that inlet flow velocity matters. On some engines at lower rpms in a fairly high gear, as you add throttle you will feel an increase in urge up to say (1/3rd throttle), but when more throttle is added without waiting for the rpms to rise not only do you get no extra urge (though maybe some more noise) you may actually get a little less. I agree with Nigel that a back to back rolling road comparison is the only sure way to confirm. Unlike Nigel I think it will go rich once you've maxed out the piston travel. Certainly this is what happens when you "run out of carb" on a tuned engine. The thing to bear in mind is that way that a CD carb works (including SUs) is to balance the jet size - that is the size of the hole left by the fit of the needle in the jet - with the vacuum above the jet, which between them determine the flow of fuel through it. By weakening the spring you reduce the vacuum above the jet reducing fuel flow - so have to use a needle with a smaller cross section to compensate. So, you may have sightly reduced pumping losses. Any minor gains here could well be offset by velocity losses. It probably does feel different - more induction noise, possibly responding to initial throttle more eagerly. Congratulations are due for getting the carb back in calibration having altered it's operating range - not a particularly easy thing to do, however, I doubt steady state torque is much affected - but hard to demonstrate without a RR session. How about fuel economy? Do you have enough mileage to compare? One thing I have to question though...... A good Triumph 2L 6 should be sweet and free-revving. Keeping below 4000 rpm, let alone 3000 rpm should be chore. I know the later Mk3 engines with their domed pistons and "emissions" cam are said to be less keen on revs, but certainly all the mk2 based ones (and tuned beyond) have been just getting into their stride by 3000 rpm. Best way to get a bit more urge is to use more of the rev range - or, if low down grunt is really your thing - you need to go 2.5.😊 Nick

Another vote for Spal via T7 design. Have one on the GT6 - it works well. Not sure what the one on my Vitesse is - came from our local radiator repair shop about 15 years ago and is still going strong. Was only about £40 at the time. It's was a very tight fit, since slightly relieved by shuffling the engine back about 15mm. Nick

Are the calipers refurbished or new? Though I’ve not heard of this problem with the type 14 calipers, it definitely is a common problem with type 16s as used on GT6/Vitesse and is caused by the caliper seals returning the pistons too far. If this proves to be the issue, removing the pads, carefully pumping the pistons out a bit, then levering the pistons back just far enough to squeeze the pads in will solve the problem, but it may well return as the pads wear down. Nick

Ideally a suitable tube that roughly matches the diameter of the inner race, either pressed, squeezed in a vice or tapped on with a hammer. Can be drifted down carefully with a punch if no other method available. Do NOT forget to put the seal on first. They can be removed unharmed with a proper bearing puller https://www.tectake.co.uk/bearing-puller-set-12-pcs-401127 Nick

On a Stag that is the exact opposite. Double trouble...... on the mk 2/3 6 pots, the studs on the pushrod side will usually come out but double-nutting. On the manifold side, it’s generally the ones next to the exhaust ports that are worst. Liberal application of a decent penetrating oil (which WD40 is NOT), such as Plus Gas or atf/acetone mix, into the gap with the nut off with extra penetration encouraged (no Pete!) by tapping the top of the stud with a hammer. Another trick is to double nut a stud then whack the top nut with a hammer at the same time as trying to undo it with a spanner. Failing that, weld the nut on nice and hot and try again. If you can get down to one stud, you can unwind it by turning the whole head - but only with the engine removed.... Done that twice now. They can be stubborn! Nick

You are correct about the theory. Practice quite often matches your experience though. You’ll find a fair bit about this on the forums as it afflicts saloons, TRs and manual Stags. Can’t remember if there is enough swing available to be able to drill through from behind and punch the remains out. Sacrificing the shaft and cutting it into sections is the quick and dirty method. Nick

Ah yes, Dolly/Toledo brakes. I have vivid memories of doing a scatter rally in my Sprint auto. My navigator was getting frustrated by my lack of pace which was due to almost total absence of brakes for much of the time due to pad fade (rock hard pedal, no stop). They had about 1.5 decent stops in them per 10 minutes driving which was woefully inadequate for the task. I did try some different pads, which helped a bit, but not as much as a manual conversion which at least gave some engine braking. At the opposite extreme, I had a big moment in a colleagues company BX, all servo and no ABS, the black marks were on the road for years...... Nick

Too much vehemence from a rather high horse IMO. Late GT6 Mk3 has a servo, on front wheels only. It needs it to maintain the correct balance and any replacement needs to match its boost ratio or that balance will be lost. Early mk 3 has no servo as standard, though some maybe had them as factory (or dealer) options, which would have been active on all four wheels. 99.8% (at least) of current MoT testers have no idea about the above and really don’t care so long as the brakes work properly, with no obvious missing parts and acceptable balance as measured by their rollers. Not that any of these cars have to presented for MoT these days anyway...... The OP was asking about servos on a Spitfire...... ...... and on a Spitfire with its brakes in good condition, fitted with suitable pads (which admittedly most of those sold “for it” are not), has very decent brakes and reasonable pedal pressures. Therefore it is valid to question the motive for the servo. To my mind, if it is possible to bring pedal pressures into the acceptable zone by a simple and relatively cheap pad swap, that has to be the best solution on grounds of cost, simplicity and reliability. If this is tried and found wanting, then the servo option remains open. BTW. My Vitesse brakes are without servo, 5/8”m/c, spaced 16PB calipers and vented discs with M1144 pads. They are effective and pedal pressures are reasonable. Even my wife says so, or rather she doesn’t complain about them which is the same thing. She does moan about the weight of the steering..... My GT6 (early mk 3) brakes are with servo, added by me because I had one going spare and space on the bulkhead. Pedal pressures are a bit lower than the Vitesse, but they have a slightly disconcerting two-tier action as the servo is slightly slow to respond. I prefer the feel of the Vitesse brakes. Nick

All 4 to maintain the correct balance as Pete says. As the Spit is 5/8” bore m/c there isn’t a smaller option. Pete is quite right about the 1144 brake pads. If you are using standard pads at present you will find the 1144s provide a very useful increase in bite/reduction in pedal pressure. I had actually bought a servo to put on my Vitesse, then tried 1144s. Servo eventually went on my GT6 years later. Worth a try.... Nick

I think it was only fitted on cars with fixed length propeller shafts. My late ‘64 1200 had one. Nick

The sheer hard work of moving a complete 6 pot tends to limit the market......

The usual failure point is rust at the bottom by the drain boss. Never seen one fail at the neck. Are you sure it’s not just slosh and overflow getting past the cap seal (they usually leak) and tracking back down the neck past the body grommet? Mine does that sometimes. My “cure” is to seal the body grommet as it seems impossible to get the cap to seal. Not over-filling is another trick but difficult as the tank has a comedy lack of neck/expansion space. Nick

My point (not well made) was that several of the new wheel types made available in period styles (Revolution 4 spoke for one) are only available in ET25 which is too much onset and actual catches on wishbones making the use of a 6mm spacer necessary. Nick

May well jump out of reverse...... Bearing surface inside the cluster doesn't look great either - or does the camera lie? Nick

First pic does indeed seem to be a very early “bossless” block. The next two pics are of a different engine which does have bosses and looks to be mk2 from the head studs. Nick

Everything you need for a matching numbers concours rebuild..... except the actual car. Ringing kit anybody? Nick

If it looks like a Mk1 (pushrod tubes by the spark plugs) then it will be 2L. That head was never used on the 2.5. Saloons have the engine mounts on the engine front plate but the cast bosses for the Vitesse mounts with tapped bolt holes should still be there. Very early versions of the 2L were made without those bosses but used Standards rather than Triumphs IIRC. Another thing to look for is whether there is a breather pipe on the side of the block by the oil filter. This indicates early small bearing engines. Nick

Probably an early 1850 box with a Vitesse bell housing. Good starting point but will almost certainly (unless it’s been updated at some point in the past) have the 1/2” mainshaft tip and will almost certainly be at least a little bit knackered. 6 cylinder boxes are a nightmare..... Nick

I know the rear deck on the saloons can get a little crusty...... but £ 3k ? 😯 That’s 60 hours @ £50/hr....... Nick

The procedure for this has changed at least 3 times and the post office folks are as confused as the rest of us. In 2010 ish, to get my PI taxation class changed, the choices were post the V5 off to the DVLA and wait, or visit the local vehicle licensing office (40 miles away in Exeter). In 2019, that office was long closed down along with nearly all the others, but my nearest main post office did it very efficiently and didn’t even want any money. Took flippin’ ages for the V5 to come back though. Nick

Have had one on my Vitesse for 15 years. And 175/70 tyres. Steering is moderately heavy at parking speeds but fine elsewhere and wonderfully direct. Also solid rack mounts and a proper UJ. I'm frequently told that this is Bad, bad, bad, and wrong, wrong, wrong, apparently nuns and kittens will die..... but I like it. Nick

Hadn’t realised you have a single throttle..... The TR6 “150” cam does have quite a lot of overlap and consequently doesn’t play nicely with shared inlets (twin SUs, plenum FI) due to reversion. Should be possible to get it fairly ok (will likely need to be quite rich in the problem area) but will always be a bit fussy at low rpm and light throttle. Nick

Fuel lift pump “priming”........

No easy task in a Vitesse engine bay. On my FI setup I have the throttle body on the end of the plenum facing forward and a conical filter on the end of that pointing between the wheel tub (bonnet down) and the radiator. It’s partly boxed to try and keep the heat out. Works well enough when moving (I can monitor the inlet air temp) but at very low speed in traffic it creeps up and up. Nick