Unkel Kunkel

If this has been on before and I am just the last person in the world to see it then please ignore but it amused me! It is titled “Triumph spitfire engine assembles itself” on Utube “11 months, 3000 pictures snd a lot of coffee” I have tried to attach it but I admit defeat!

Echoing Pete’s comment - Is there a need for ” De-carbonising ” or “decoking” ? I haven’t even heard the terms for years . The Saturday afternoon ritual whipping the top off engines to scrape the head and the piston tops (trying to leave a rim of carbon around the edge in an attempt to mantain a seal, of course) I thought had disappeared with such things as side-valve sit-up and beg Ford Prefects. The only “ decarbonising” I have had to in recent times is clean the thick carbon sludge from a seized EGR valve - on a thoroughly modern diesel.

I fairly recently separated the body from the chassis of a 1973 MK1V Spitfire. I know from the records of its one previous owner that this was the first time.The wheel arches had received the usual coating of bitumous underseal. Where there was still paint, most of the chassis was in the original pimento red. In some less accessible areas such as tops of chassis rails had some thin areas of a what looked like a matt red primer, perhaps as overspray of body primer when the body had been fixed on.Other areas were in plain black as were parts of the chassis which were bolted to the body work. This suggests, as the scrapman says, that a black painted chassis was bolted to the body then the combination sprayed with the the body colour. In general the paint coverage of the chassis was poor with some areas barely covered with what appears to be a single coat of black. I am always surprised they have lasted so long,really.

What a sad picture! It has been left outside in the rain for .. how many winters? It will be seized solid.It looks like anything attached to it is either broken, seriously corroded or both. I think if you look carefully you will see the characteristic marks left by the ten foot barge poles possesed only by the most brave.

These are brilliant for fast paint removal and aren’t damaging to panel work The name Dronco does not inspire but they very good ! They are 115 mm for angle grinder and fairly cheap from Weldequip.com

dichloromethane /methylene dichloride /DCM (as used to be in “old’ Nitromors) In the domestic / hobby situation / ocassional user, (not in the industrial setting) be really nasty stuff if not used with great care regarding inhalation. I am no fan of EU and its rules, but I would say the restrictions were decades overdue.It was restricted in the US years ago. There is a mass of well- documented data about its toxicity - from medical articles highlighting specific cases (often tragic) ,animal data , biochemical data.Very serious effects from short term exposure.Some of the effects are more long term however with neurological damage and a large study in America showed a significant increased risk of pancreatic cancer from frequent exposure. Its dangers are very real.

I think it is a Spitfire manifold that has had a servo connection. The “T’ shaped water pipe suggests 1500 Spit. but doesn’t the 1500 come with a screw-in blanking plug at this site? If it was aMk3 or MkIV , the pipe would be straight and the number on the manifold would be 308087) More commonly the 1300 looks like this with just a flat “boss” but if drilled /tapped for vaccuum pipe for servo like I have done here.

As a total amateur, self- taught welder who originally bought a cheap welder before buying a decent one , my view would be “don’t buy a cheap welder”. It might be ok, but cheap versions of all sorts of tools and equipment almost always prove difficult to use and disappoint.They frustrate even the most experienced and for the newcomer, if they are not disheartened and their enthusiasm undermined, they will end up having to buy something better. Look at a decent welder and subtract the cost of a cheap one -this is what you will save by not buying twice. My “second buy “ is a Clarke 160 TM ,What a difference!.A delight to use.Even I can now weld to a standard that pleases -and continues to surprise me. I echo the good advice given on here re migweld.co.uk and large Argon/CO2 mix cylinders. I add - 1)Get a self -darkening welding helmet. They really are marvelous .Apart from a decent welder, this was undoubtedly the single most important thing that helped me. 2) Play time is Learning time - and very important.- Mess about welding up any old bits of scrap steel you can get your hands on,especially scrap body panels ,using all the different settings, especially the wire speed which you will discover is quite critical and dial settings are not “ linear”. Good luck and enjoy your welding!

A friend told me a tale about going to buy rope from a chandlers. The rather formidable elderly woman who ran it enquired “ How many fathoms do you want?” “Err ,how big is a fathom?”he enquired. She bellowed for her husband to appear.At her command he meekly outstretched his arms (for an adult male = a fathom approx 6 feet ) to allow measuring to proceed.

The why? is to prevent the more light fingured and inquisitive members of society opening the bonnet of your car.Depends on where you park your car and where you live, of course. There is a lock that can be fitted that was an official accessory ,I think but it entailed putting a hole in the bonnet. To the second question, I would think either the standard “cone” or a duplicate.

Came across these two pics on an American site showing a remote bonnet locking device for a Spitfire. You may be all familiar with this but I have never seen this idea before.I think it is rather clever. Works by a bowden cable and the rest of the components available from many donors at the breakers. If the cable fails then the mechaism looks to be accessible from an opened door. The original handles can be retained for originality - or presumably removed.

“Golf tees” triggers ancient joke memory.. - Young lady is very impressed to be given a lift in a a very expensive car whose owner is on his way to play golf. As they glide along he points out all the special luxury features of the limo. She picks up two golf tees that have fallen on the floor. ”Oh, What are these for..” ”They are to rest your balls on when driving” “Gosh ,Rolls Royce really do think of everything,don’t they?”

Thanks,Pete - it is of no great import but it is intriguing.

Yes, someone must have known , Pete. They are probably , well err...” not contactable by normal means”now, unfortunately. The only thing a thicker washer might be useful for,I can think of,would be if the bushes became squashed/worn/slack, and the L side would take the torque,then a thicker washer could be a simple way of taking up the slack without the need to dismantle a lot (as t’other end of the bolt is welded to the chassis frame )?

Did you leave it in place,Derek? - I could better understand it replacing rather than adding to the standard washer perhaps. To further perplex, the official Triumph SpitMk1V Repair Manual makes no mention of the “extra” washer but for some reason refers to the pair of standard washers as”special” though they just look like flat washers to me. It also mentions that when fully torqued up it should be possible to rotate the lower rubber bush with one’s fingers which ,as Derek points out, you won’t be able to do.

Strange, isn’t it ? But ......part 50 is quoted as “2” part 51 “ one, Left hand side only”

This was discussed recently, at some length I know ,but since then I came across this In the Practical Classics Restoration Book p 48, In mentions that the extra washer L hand side only “ to counter attack torque and prevent knocks“ It is shown and listed (part no51) in the Moss catalogue. At least this shows where it is supposed to go This perhaps suggests not original spec but it is an “Add- on” . - Mk1V did not have one.

I bought a ( Spitfire Mk1V) spring recently from one of the “big name” suppliers. Apart from it arriving promptly and being well packaged, I was disappointed: The first inkling it might be different to the one I was replacing,was the way the carrier struggled with it to the door - It weighed so much more than the old one! The lower leaf was over 10mm thick, the original being 6.8 mm(pict) The thicker lowest leaf meant that the swing “box” can not close down on the diff recess.I don’t know how significant this- but it doesn’t look right(pict). The “buttons ” / spacers - two were completely misplaced from their recesses and also” squigded” / torn. The central stud (which locates the lowest leaf in the diff) threaded and bolted end was excessively long so that with its securing nut it obstructed the sleeved bolt that goes between the lowest and the 2nd leaf in the “swing box”.Attempts at fitting this shattered the sleeve and bent the bolt(Yes , I know, it was silly to attempt to fit it..) I suppose I could have shortened the stud bolt ;replaced all the buttons ; ignored the size differences of the leaves and the weight but I think something unless something is advertised with information about it being different,even if it is upgraded from the original, then it is reasonable to assume that what you will get will be reasonnably “like for like.” I asked the firm if they could give further info./ discuss / confirm it was OK for me to use. Certainly what followed was a rapid and civil reply, but there was no engagement in a discussion about the issues, only the suggestion to return it. I opted to clean up and refurb.my old spring and return the “new” one. From the internet, for less than a tenner, I got a length of UHMW polyethylene rod ( better than Nylon or Teflon ,apparently).I did find it very” stringy” and a bit frustrating for an amateur like me to turn but finally produced some “buttons” for the spring. Have yet to fit it on the vehicle.

Many thanks everyone for your views.The consensus seems to be that the answer is ....

Hmn, I think on the basis that there wasn’t one there originally and it seemed OK = I cant make it better than OK but can make it worse, so I will not add one - is that a reasonable approach?

I still just don’t get it at all ! As we know, there are 2 rear bushed mounting points secured by a log horzontal bolt and two front bushed mountings from which the front of the diff is supported/ hangs. So what effect can putting a spacer in just one of these 4 points have? if so why just the left.p and not the right? and if it is fitted how does it not compromise the tighting of that mounting?

Thanks everyone - and and I should have noticed it has been discussed before in April. I suppose this ‘73 Mk1V has done just under 100k without one of these so obviously not essential!

Can anyone through some light on this for me please? The parts suppliers list a “spacer washer “ but for “Left hand “ only for the front diff mounts on the Spitfire. Is this something to do with torque action on the mounting? I don’t have one of these fitted on my Mk 1V (just the thinner washers each side) - should there be one? If so,does it fit under the thin washer or above the bush?

OK , a bit of a cliche - and the expression does invite 'what about the other owners?, but this is in praise of lady drivers - or at least one I knew well who was a devoted Spitfire owner. When I bought my a Mk 1V Spitfire from her , it was genuinely a one owner. A lady owner .In fact a very delightful elderly lady and keen driver who bought it new in Devon in 1973 and drove it with great care.She and her husband kept every scrap of documentation from the original invoice. When I bought it about ten years ago, It had been standing her garage for a few years.Sadly, her health and her Spitfire's bodily health, ie rust in the "usual places', had almost simultaneously brought an end to their motoring fun. It had a genuine 97,500 miles in the clock when it started its "slumber" in 1990. It had been used for a combination of local runs and many long trips from Devon up to Southport where her daughter was at school.In the mid eighties she, her husband and the Spitfire " emigrated" from Devon to my neck if the woods. Although the body work was very rusty (and is still proving to be a long term project for me to restore) , the 'mechanical bits' were /are really quite remarkable: The engine has never been touched other than routine maintenance .It runs very smoothly, quietlty and lustily. There is barely discernable crank shaft end float. it still had its original clutch. The gearbox is fine apart from a very slight whine and sticky 2nd synchro when cold. The diff is silent with hardly any backlash and on the bench, the bearings are fine and even the 1973 gear oil was remarkably clear with only a trace of debris when flushed out recently. The propshaft joints are fine.Even original drive shaft joints are fine. The trunions were original but I changed then .likewise the track rod ends which felt fine. The front wheel bearings were in mint condition. The discs and calipers were the originals. Front springs /dampers = original. The rear dampers were replaced in the early 80s - and these Girlings are now weak. Interesting to reflect : From the extensive documentation, it is clear that this car was always greased and oiled as "per the book".Nothing special , but it never missed an oil change or service.It had quite a few relatively long runs. Perhaps, unlike many Spitfires in the seventies and eighties, this car did not have "young blades' doing "standing start " gladiatorial take offs from the traffic lights (and perhaps most importantly) skimping on servicing and it perhaps it benefited from her more sympathetic style of driving. She was really attached to her Spitfire.My purchase of the car and its emergence from the garage was celebrated with a bottle of champagne and a tearful farewell from her an a reiterated pledge from me that I would restore it.Each year I sent her a Xmas card with pictures showing the where latest stage the slow restoration had reached - I do regret not having completed the restoration before she died. Her devoted travelling companion for many of those long miles was her small dog- a remarkably smelly dog, I remember.Despite most of the car having now been rebuilt , I swear there is still an elusive essence of smelly dog somewhere in there at times..

Your're absolutely right John it looks a bit precarious but in mitigation and not obvious in the photo, the crane hydraulics have been let down so the crane frame itself is wedged tightly between the chassis offside chassis rail and wall and then the hydraulics pumped minimally.For the chassis to move it would not be reliant on the hydraulics or sling, the crane would have to be removed and also the other rear stand ( out of view).If this happened ,the off side wheels would rest against the wall.The garage is narrow.. unless the wall ..