krissto2015

Hello, Does anyone have a rear glass/screen for a Spitfire Mk1..3 factory hardtop? Does not need to be perfect. Thanks, Chris

My bid was successful and the friction rollers are on their way to me. Many thanks for the tip-off, Keith. 😁

Thanks Keith. Yes, that's the part. I just placed a bid. 🤞

I am still on the lookout for one of these. Hence bumping this thread. Thank you.

Many thanks. Josef, for the suggestions i.e. to use "old bits of wind chime that I put a thread on each end of along with some bits of pen barrel and suitable diameter springs." etc., from this link ( https://forum.tssc.org.uk/topic/9259-the-spitfire-that-just-needed-a-tidy-up/page/3/#comments ). That's fine for seats that use the 'spring method' but my seat frame had the nylon friction roller and I think the bracketry that the headrest slides into is different. Quote from Rimmer Bros, unedited: "The head rest is held up in place by a friction roller system that is secured in a welded section at the top of the seat back frame. Two types of friction roller system were used, they are not inerchangeable as they fit different sized welded brackets on the seats." So I am still on the lookout for anyone who has a late Spitfire 1500 scrap seat frame with this nylon type roller still intact. I could probably spend time coming up with a bespoke engineering solution using bearings/spacers/springs but I have spent so many years upgrading and re-engineering this car that it is far easier to just simply get a used/correct part... Thanks, Chris

Hello, I need a headrest friction roller of the 'nylon' type, as fitted to late Spitfire 1500/GT6 Mk3 seats. It is NLA anywhere and can be seen courtesy of this Rimmer Bros link (part number ZKC1271)... https://rimmerbros.com/Item--i-GRID005922 Why do I need one? When I had my seat frame blast cleaned and power coated, I forgot to remove the roller from the frame (OE held in place by tape). At 200 degrees C powder coat temperatures, it melted and dissolved into a soggy mess! Has anyone out there got a scrap seat that still has this roller fitted and would sell it to me? Many thanks in advance, Chris

Many thanks to all for your responses. So my final quandary is whether to go for the Rimmer driveshafts or the CDD items - and that leaves me wondering if they are, in fact, the same thing? My guess is that the Rimmer items are based on Jigsaw designs and the CDD parts are independently developed - but I could be wrong on this? Currently I have an early pair of Canley CV driveshafts fitted to my car, but I believe that the inner 'pot joints' are snatching a bit and I prefer the design of the lobro inners. Thanks, Chris

Apologies, Pete. I reacted too quickly and should have read your post correctly. Steve, yes I believe they are one and the same, so please do take some measurements when you get a chance.

https://shop.tssc.org.uk/product/cv-shafts-rotoflex-pr ???

Hello, I have a question for the club shop. Before I go ahead and place an order for the GT6 CV driveshafts ( https://shop.tssc.org.uk/product/cv-shafts-rotoflex-pr ), I need to know how much 'plunge' is accommodated by the inner Lobro joint. Do you keep these driveshafts in stock, or does Mark at Jigsaw make them for you to order? I asked Mark this question many months ago, but he never got back to me. It's quite a simple experiment to set up; all we need to do is measure the amount of linear movement when the inner joint is pushed in and out to its extremities. But that all depends if you can grab a driveshaft off the shelf... Many Thanks, Chris

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/283872996707

Hello Peter, The Herald seal and rear glass is now fitted to my hardtop. It's not perfect but will suffice for the short term I'll upload some photos when I get a chance... Chris

A quick update in this topic. I have communicated with Bill at rarebits4classics and got a bit of history regarding rear seal part 903599. I am sure that he will not mind me summarising (I hope correctly) what he stated. Yes, he did supply this seal up until 2016, but stopped doing so due to problems. Apparently, the hardtop glass could have two different sizes, one 'taller' than the other, I think due to differences with OE and Triplex alternatives. So despite Triumph quoting just one part number of seal for all glass, some combinations would fit into the hardtop aperture and others would not. So Bill stopped making that seal. He very kindly advised me that a Herald front rubber seal is so very close to the OE rubber profile that this will do the trick. I have ordered a new Herald seal and will post an update if this works out. If so, this thread will be copied/moved to the technical section so as to help others... Chris

Hello thescrapman, No. I know COH Baines well, as a previous customer. I contacted them and they cannot offer anything suitable. Regards, Chris

Hello Colin, According to Rimmer Bros, Rarebits is where they used to get 903599 part but he no longer supplies. Although it has been suggested that the GT6 rear hatch seal is suitable, it is not. I bought one for that very reason, but yesterday, Mobile Windscreens and myself struggled for a couple of hours to get it to fit and we failed. It's not quite the correct section... Chris

Hello, Does anyone have a used or new/old stock rear glass rubber seal to suit an early Mk1-3 Spitfire Hardtop. This seal is NLA from any of the Triumph stockists (part number 903599) and it does not look hopeful for it to be available anytime soon (I have asked). So I am rather stuck... Many Thanks, Chris

My late Father bought the car in 1972, when it was only 3 years old. The car has been in the family ever since, so they are the same turrets, never changed. The chassis is the same too, albeit completely refurbished by myself i.e. blast cleaned, 2K painted, internally waxoyled etc. There is no sign of any damage to the front of the chassis. I appreciate John's comments that I should check it with plumb lines but that is not easy on a car that is 99.9% fully built...

Just to clear up any confusion, I have circled in red the view of the turret when looking in from the side. It can be seen that it is angled somewhere between 12 and 1 o'clock. It is this angle that we conclude cannot be adjusted even if the bolts are slackened and an attempt made to rotate. Do we all agree?

Hello John, No way is there any crash damage. The car has been in the family since I was a mere 8 year old and it has never hit anything! I suspect that maybe the lower wishbones have bent slightly over the years. Or perhaps the turrets were never equal when made in 1969. Since everything else on the car is either new or bespoke, I might buy a new pair of lower wishbones and beef them up while at it. I'll be hillclimbing it next year (I hope)... Chris

So, in conclusion, there is no way of rotating the turret in the plane of the wheel rotation. This is due to the tight fit of the tapped plates within the chassis brackets, right? So a turret will always go back in the same fixed position every time. I will therefore not waste any time stripping my suspension and attempting it. Lower shims seems the only option here, to get my caster equalised on each side.

Hello Pete. Thanks for your response. No., I am not talking about that optional shim between the chassis top and turret inner. And I really do mean caster. I am talking about turret rotation from the 12 0' clock vertical. Our chassis is up-swept at front so as to give a built-in amount of caster. That's why the lower wishbone brackets are different i.e. higher at the front, lower at the rear. What I am asking is if the turrets have any scope to increase/decrease that up-swept angle. Do you see what I mean? By the way, for any future replies, I have Canley upper wishbones and the Caterham lower ball joint, so stressing vertical link threads and trunnions is not an issue here. Best Regards, Chris

Hello All, Before I embark on stripping everything down on my modified Spitfire Mk3, I need to ask a question regarding the front turret location to the chassis. It is many years since I bolted the turrets to the chassis, hence my query. As we know there are tapped plates in the chassis to which the turret is bolted (4 off) and a single vertical bolt that holds it down at the inner point. My question is, with all bolts slackened, is it possible to adjust the rotational angle and then tighten them to give more or less incline when viewed perpendicular to the chassis? Or do the tapped plates dictate that there is little or no adjustment? I ask because I have so much more visible caster on the N/S compared to the O/S on my car and I do not wish to have a huge stack of lower wishbone shims to correct this - if it is indeed possible to tweak the turret angle. The car has been off the road during a very long development/build, everything is new and up-rated and I'd like to get it roughly correct before taking it to the MOT and subsequent all-four wheel alignment. Anyone out there got a chassis and turret to hand to try this experiment? Thanks in advance, Chris

Hello, Thought I would have a quick trial fit of my OE factory hardtop today, after many years off the car during its rebuild - and I am really struggling to get the front seal to work. It is part number 806144 and is common to Spitfires 1-3, TR4-6 etc. It is the seal that locates onto the top of the windscreen capping and meets the front of the hardtop. A picture of it on this Rimmers link https://rimmerbros.com/Item--i-806144 I place this on top of the screen and lower the hardtop onto the car. Passing the two long bolts through the pre-punched holes in the rubber, but the rubber then disappears in the centre and there is no way of pulling it forwards to make a decent seal. Also, there is a 'lump' at each end which I assume is supposed to slot into the tops of the drop glass seals which are at each side of the screen frame. If that's the case then the moulding is nowhere near correct and is way too short. Or are those lumps supposed to do something else? It's really tricky to put into words in this post, but has anyone else struggled with fitting this seal? Are these pattern mouldings poorly made such that they don't follow the contour of the screen capping correctly? Thanks, Chris

Thanks Clive. In order to get the car on the road/track for next year, the quickest solution is the MGF rear setup. The PCD for the disc/hub is the good-old-fashioned 95.25mm (3-3/4") as per all our small chassisTriumphs, so that helps. I will also machine the VL to use the MGF wheel bearing, as I am fed up with fiddling around with shims/spacers in order to get the end-float correct. Yes, the OE MGF calipers are not light, but they will do for now. I also own a mid-engined Ginetta G32 1.9i, which uses O/E Sierra/Scorpio/Granada rear calipers and discs. There are upgrades available from Hi-Spec to make the unsprung mass much more lightweight. See http://www.hispeccalipers.co.uk/svault2si.html In the longer term, this is probably what I will use on my G32 and also adapt to suit the MGF discs on my Spitfire/GT6. Chris

Yes, lots of work put into this car, but please may I make one more polite request that somebody out there supplies me with the patterns/drawings/sketches for the GT6 vertical link caliper brackets - to suit the MGF rear disc arrangement? If not, I guess I will have to do it myself, using cardboard templates and all the trials and tribulations associated with getting them made. I am now on the phase of getting the body prepped for paint and I am running out of time to build it up over the Winter for (hopefully) a few test days and hillclimbs in 2017, so every little helps. Thanks in advance... Chris