Bfg

Just out of interest ..on a wet day in February, I've been playing around with ideas on structure to land a roll bar on. My own thoughts, for some time now, have been along the lines of the Triumph Stag, Lancia Beta and Porsche Taga, with a removable lid and a fold down rear window. I think Mark Powell's post suggests he's half way to doing something similar and/or equally as interesting . . So, in consideration of fitting a roll bar into a TR4A, I've been looking into the available off-the-shelf designs, the intrusion of large diameter tubing into a very tight space (I'm 6'5" tall and broad shouldered so I'll need the seat all the way back ..if not even further ! and also max shoulder width), and then also the issues of landing a roll-over bar anywhere near a body chassis mounting or through to the chassis itself. The IRS chassis of the TR4A is particularly useless in this latter respect. The TR6 however made a slight improvement in-so-much as the interior's body step-over-the-rear-axle-structure was at least bolted to it. < tubby TR4A seats illustrate how little space there is along side them for a a roll over bar to squeeze in. As an aside, until today I hadn't realised the amount of work there was in fitting a Surrey back-light frame to a TR4 - 6. Don't quote me because I've never done it, but as it seems as though the folding hood frame has to be removed completely from the car, as do the press-stud or lift-a-dots around the back. I had envisaged it was more like a bolt-on hardtop which sat over the top of everything original. Certainly if this is the case - then swapping back to the folding hood arrangement is not a 2-minute, un-clip from car and hang it from the garage rafters, job. I would personally prefer a lift off (hard) surrey top lid, and a very quick to open rear window like the aforementioned cars ..rather than a rag top. And given the choice I would also like some degree of side intrusion & roll-over protection, particularly if that can be pushed out to the extremities of width (for the sake of interior airiness, as well as the lesser likelihood of my head fouling that roll-bar) then I simply have to accept that the conversion is likewise not going to be "quickly" reversible. Anyway., if like the aforementioned and Mark's design, a roll-over bar's load is spread onto the B-post structure and along the body ..rather than on four relatively small feet, then that may be more stable in the fore and aft (important in a sliding forward or backwards roll). And if those parts of the body tube were specifically reinforced then all the better still. Naturally with full-width roll bar designs like these - the original folding-hood frame cannot get passed the structure. Conversely the structure can be pushed out as far as the doors side glass, so interior intrusion might be much less. Today I played around in Adobe Photoshop with an image borrowed off the internet of a TR6's rear body step, inner wing and inside of the B-post structure . . This is where I started from (left image) . . . . and (to the right) is work in progress. The proposed reinforcing starts off with a thicker plate fitted (welded) inside the rather lightweight B-post (which I've illustrated in light green. It's orientated 90-deg to the car's CL. And then inside the car ; the first reinforcing plate is a wide saddle strap over the wheel-arch (seen as a red border line with light-grey tint) This goes quite a way over the top in readiness to land the diagonal-rear bracing of a roll bar. A forward plate extends along the floor alongside the sill (quite a way forward with the IRS chassis) to the standard body-mount. The inside of the inner wing panel, the B-post and the sill then have vertical plates, which makes a near 90 degree angle along the reinforcement's welded join. Additional boxing in is seen below where a roll bar may sit, it purpose is again to transfer vertical (rolled over bar) loads. The resultant box structure is stiff in vertical compression, when the attachment to the body shell minimises the potential to twist or splay (common failings with angle-iron like structures). The rear deck is reinforced with deep vertical web(s), brown coloured in my illustration, which when attached to the original bodywork would add enormously to the strength and rigidity of the transverse deck beam. I'm looking into moving my car's fuel tank from under here, and so am envisaging the web plates being both under the front and the back of this deck, and then closing under those webs as a large box section beam, full width of the car's body tube. This being similar to an Xk150 I once owned. In any case the additional stiffness of the body shell, after pop-rivetting an aluminium firewall across / in front of the fuel tank is well known. Presently tentative sketched in (..in light blue) is a reinforcing angle beam across the rear axle deck, which ties in to the TR6's body mounts. I've shown this locally scalloped for the seat backs to sit into. All in all these reinforcement plates could be prefabricated and welded to the body tub, or else be bolted-in as Left and Right handed structures, plus the rear deck deep web. In any case the whole would be hidden under carpet & trim. The most obvious outward sign of any additional structure in there would be the doubling plate of the sill, in the rear corner of the open door frame. I envisage the top if those webs to be closed off and finished in body colour. Together these, easily home cut and fabricated from flat plate, reinforcing structures would contribute to side-impact protection, would stiffen the rear deck and rear half of the door sills, and of course would be a load-distributing foundation to land the upper roll-over bar on., without the legs of that roll-bar needing to squeeze passed the seat back to get to the floor.. Added weight yes, but lightening holes could be cut if the time and trouble warranted it. Conversely, the shorter the length of tube (roll-over bar in this instance) the smaller the diameter needed to withstand the same bending force ..and that in turn relates to less intrusion within the interior. Anyway, I'm just playing around with ideas to see where, if anywhere, they lead. Wrap up warm and I bid you a very good evening. Pete.

I found the budget brands make savings in build costs with lubrication, but if taken apart when new and their gearbox is greased properly and with a drip or two of oil on the bearings - they do last well.

I've been to Oban once, which I think was the year after I left school ! ..early 1970's ! Oban is a very odd place to me, with its famed for being unfinished building being really quite ugly, but perhaps that's because it rained for the two weeks and the architecture seem so black. Nevertheless, the atmosphere among ruins along the coastline was something special, in a haunting sort of way, because of the mist. We did stop at restaurant en-route and, aside from being entranced by a truly gorgeous rosy-cheeked waitress, I had the best steak ever. In my mind it'll be worth going back just for that sort of dining experience. But in an open top car I'll have to be flexible in the dates - so as to choose the weather more carefully.

Thanks Paul, I've heard of the Gordon Bennet Rally and from the briefest of looks at the website link you kindly provided it looks to be a classic and vintage car show tour. I wonder how I'd get on with being organised and having to conform.. but then for just four days I guess I might manage to behave, and it might be fun to join the party. However I've never heard of the Wild Atlantic Way, and that is now on my bucket list, as long as I remember to pack my walking boots too. Such incredible scenery makes me want to go back to flying light aircraft. Thanks for those gems, Pete.

I wonder how true that might actually be ? Although the TR6 is a bigger and squarer car, but I recall from my MK2 Spit that there was a surprising amount of space within the interior because the seats were very skinny, the lift-off hood & its bows was compact, and there was a parcel shelf and deep foot-wells. The boot was deep rather than long but there was a lot of space under the bonnet (if only you could secure things). Mind you it was 40 years ago that owned that car ..so my memory might not be as accurate as I'd like to think it were. Conversely the TR6 foot-wells sit on top of its chassis rails, the seats are deeply padded, and the fold down hood takes up a lot of space. I must admit the TR4 - 6 don't seem so very spacious, but perhaps I've grown broader to fill the space !

Hello all, I'm thinking that this would be a good time to route plan some road trips ..for when the current dangers and lock-down restrictions are lifted. I'm thinking in terms of the UK to start off with, and only when the car is 'proven' reliable - I'll then head across to continental Europe. I'm thinking of staying in inexpensive country B&B's mainly, but taking a tent with me so that I can camp, where allowed, in isolated places of natural beauty. A few years ago, I read in a magazine of a fabulous motorcycling route along the north-eastern coast. So I'd particularly like to visit Ireland in an open-top Triumph. I've never been to Ireland, so don't know whether a low slung 1960's sports-car like a TR is still appropriate.? Otherwise I might only imagine that off-the-beaten track rural Ireland is rather like Cornwall ? Surely the Emerald Isle has many places worth going-well-out-of-the-way to visit. I live in East Anglia and have thoroughly enjoyed Suffolk countryside for riding my vintage motorcycles. But to be honest I've only every holidayed in the Lakes, in Wales or Scotland - a few times in a lifetime. Otherwise I've only fleetingly been through other places in England when on business. So I really don't know the UK at all. I probably know my way down to the Black Forest in Germany, or down to Valencia in Spain better ! My choice of stead is to be the TR4A, but carrying luggage, tools, consumable & spares for a month or six weeks of touring in any open top Triumph will need some serious thought ..and perhaps a few clever ideas to make the best of what spaces we have. Anyone ? In any case, perhaps some of you might share any unexpectedly great routes and places to stay you've discovered. Perhaps a photo or two too ? Thanks, Pete.

^ Likewise, when touching in a narrow / sharp scratch on my motorcycle's frame or tinware - I usually use aerosol paint, sprayed into the can's lid, and then a fine sable brush (used in water colour painting) to apply it. I then wipe my finger gently over it to wipe the excess from around the 'crevice'. The idea being to fill the scratch's canyon with paint which both glues its edges from lifting and fills it with colour. I've never used a glove though because I can't feel the surface well enough. Don't use a cloth or tissue because that drags the paint out and also leaves fluff. I guess I could use a plastic spatula instead of my finger tip, but the latter is always close to hand ! Pete. PS., Thanks, that was a useful reminder for me to buy some brushes off ebay.., now rather than when I need one.

for scratches and very localised blemishes I wouldn't use masking tape at all. Instead I'd cut a narrow slot in piece of (cereal packet) cardboard and spray through that to limit the area being sprayed. moving that card around slightly as you spray softens the edge. Thereafter there's no tape to peel off and when the paint is dry and hard its feathered edges can be hand flattened with 1000 then 1200 grit on a rubber block before being polished. Pete.

The ram effect (high pressure) works in conjunction with a lower pressure ..of where the air is extracted from. In the case of the mini, the air pressure under the wheel arch was lower than that just behind the frontal grill - so, even without a fan, the air is still sucked through the shrouded radiator core (..at least it would be ..if its shroud was fitted much closer than that of the red mini !, seen in the piccie).

I agree with Pete on this matter, but also add that at car speeds above 30 mph / 50 KPH, the ram air's angle of attack on a fixed blade fan means it takes hardly, if any, engine power at all to turn. Certainly things like the alternator or dynamo, and the water pump consume considerably more. Although I do like viscous fans, I've chosen to stick with a fixed blade fan on my Triumph because it's the ultimate in reliability and maintenance free. I have however swapped the original and crudely shaped aluminium 4-bladed fan, with its steel hub, to a much better shaped and very much lighter-weight 6-bladed plastic fan (from a later model of Triumph, so it was a straight swap). Indeed the plastic moulded fan is 1/5 the mass of the car's original fan. And it is of course also very much lighter than a viscous fan. Personally, I'm not in favour of adding an additional power drain on the battery, nor of an electric fan buzzing away when the engine is turned off. Usually the bracketry and extra wires are ugly, and then there's more to go wrong with its thermal switch, a timer, and the manual override of an electric fan. Those situated in front of a radiator core are said to block the air flow to some degree, and some cars don't have the space to fit an electric fan behind it. The electricity it consumes does of course need to be replenished via the generator, so quite possibly they're not quite the power saver they are made out to be.

Ok., aside from the debate around aesthetics, the so called 'originality' of a classic car, and/or the intrusion of roll-over protection into the limited amount of space behind seats and clear of a folding hood (or within a hardtop) - let me offer a few (hopefully useful) pointers in road-car roll-over bar design. For convenience, to highlight its 'key features', I'll use the following crudely-penned sketch, which illustrates the type I designed * and manufactured for one of my open-top sports cars (.. from '79 through to the mid '90's I was in the car &/or kit-car business). This particular item was for a front-wheel-drive road car, with a chassis but no driveshaft tunnel, but the general principles carry across to RWD where behind the seats is often a transverse, and essentially straight, step over the rear axle . . . This design of roll-over bar was to also to improve side-impact protection. had its main loop is leant backwards, well clear of the occupants shoulders and heads. that angle (think in terms of vectors) also offered resistance to the roll-bar tilting / rotating forward if the car was inverted and sliding backwards (perhaps after having tripped over tree). was triangulated with rear legs, again so the forces from either sliding forwards or backwards (in an inverted car or on its side) would not tilt the roll bar (rotate it to being flat with the car's deck. The greater the angle, of the rear diagonals, the more stable the mountings (like a tripod with its legs opened wider is more stable). those corners had gusset plates (welded flush to their outsides and inside) to a.) dissipate loads away from the localised stress of the welds, and b.) to shorten the free length / span of each segment. (These being higher than the car's sides, I used the inner gusset on either side for conveniently positioned seat belt mountings) the triangulated legs were tied back to main roll bar at their feet, to stop them from bending / splaying. the main structure was bolt through the body tub and directly to the chassis rails. the ties to the rear diagonals were through bolted to the body tub (along the length of corner between the inner mudguard and the flat area over the rear axle). the length of 'feet' (both the transverse beam and those running back) allowed numerous bolt positions to be picked up. These distribute alongways tearing, twisting and pulling (..shear and tension) loads across a far greater expanse of body tub and chassis. Generally speaking, the more mountings, and the greater they are dispersed around the body &/or along the chassis, the better. (which is, in part, why roll cages work so much better than roll bars). Backing plates were used under all fastening bolts, to minimise the risk of their ripping-out. similarly compression loads (ie., the car landing inverted onto them) are better distributed across a far broader expanse of body tub and chassis. (If a 3/4-tonne load of crashing car is hammered into a wheel-arch, via a very neat little 3" x 2" pad - then the 1mm thick metal under that pad will buckle). used the car's lower seat-belt mountings to further tie its structure into reinforced / strong points of the car. (these particular kit-cars also had side-beams, which tied into the windscreen post structure and a traverse beam under the dashboard). Body or suspension mounts and bump stop might likewise be so used, as might sills and the door's frame. The top width of the main roll over tube is narrower for a.) folding hood-frame clearance, b.) to encourage an inverted car to roll back over onto its side, thereby enabling the occupants to get out and away quickly, c.) to minimise the structural beam's span length (short is stiffer than long un-braced lengths). Of course the inside top width was still clear of the occupant's head. The roll bar was made from a suitable grade, thickness and diameter of steel and the tube's bending was smooth (kinks and folds focus high loads and potential failure). The corners also had a generous radius (which in effect 'cut the corners' between straight lengths - again to minimise each beam's span (straight unsupported length). I'm sure there are other aspects, but those are what immediately come to mind. No, such a design would not be approved for most racing. It does not have an intrusive diagonal brace, nor does it have a cross beam for a 4-point seat harness. Nor does it have padding. But it was compact and so practical, and visually acceptable for a road car. I hope the above helps you (indicates what you might look for) when choosing a roll bar for your own car. Pete. * My design was a derivative of that designed by (now Professor) Anthony Stevens ..which was used in his Cipher sports cars. It used a very similar loop with rear-diagonals but was welded directly to its multi-tubular chassis. (I had the great fortune to learn my trade directly from working for, and later with, Tony. And he has remained a dear friend ever since). ^ My own Falcon kit car. c. mid-1980's .. and the Stevens Cipher 1980 In my opinion, the roll bar doesn't detract from either car's style.

As a compromise might I suggest .. When driving something like that - the tables are turned ..and everyone in a modern will be scampering away to buy a bigger, stronger, military grade (MdUK) Section M roll bar (which as you can see is double braced to the transmission tunnel)

I concur, by ancient definition a forum is "for the discussion of questions of public interest". It wouldn't be much of a conversation if everyone thought the same. John and I may disagree on certain points and to me that's constructive because I am glad to learn from another man's experience. I also happen to respect John's opinion. In this particular instance I didn't disagree with John's advice to fit a roll bar with diagonal bracing. I was simply presenting various counter arguments for Alan to appraise for himself the benefit versus the inconvenience and cost. He did after all ask for "any thoughts, good or bad" I do however believe that many commercially supplied cut-price rollbars for d.i.y. fitting to a car's body panel and wheel arches - that were never designed to take such dynamic loads ..let alone after a car's 40 years of everyday road use and abuse, concealed corrosion and budget home repairs ..which are unknown to the current owner. In such a scenario it is possible that having a roll cage is potentially more dangerous than having no roll-bar at all. As a retired design engineer - I did at one time professionally design roll-over protection for agricultural, commercial, and airport use. We used an independent test facility to assess our designs on a dedicated rig which used hydraulic rams to loads from the front, back, top, and sides ..or any combination of those. The loadings and deflections ..and also any failures of welds were duly recorded, and where necessary we made improvements. There was and most likely still exists a paper trail of the designs we manufactured at that time. So if I might - I'll simply pose a few simple question.. When you buy a roll bar to fit to your car ; was the man who designed it professionally qualified and/or capable to do so ? Was it properly, and independently, tested ? What quality assurance checks are made in material stock and manufacturing.? Are the mountings universal rather than specific to a model of car, and were they tested.? And like seat-belt mountings - have load paths been thought through and the adjacent structure suitably reinforced ? Was the design ever approved by the vehicle's manufacturer ? I ask these points after reading on the TR forum of owners cutting the feet off brand-new roll bars "from the usual suspects" and having to alter them - because they didn't fit the shape of the car. And I have seen so many cases of thoroughly rotten B-posts and sill & floors on cars that until stripped-out were thought to be structurally roadworthy. Personally, I feel that a roll bar offers a false sense of security and worse still - that a badly designed one, made of the wrong material and/or inadequately mounted might rip out in an accident ..and actually cause injury. Or else they may crumple under the load and be a steel bar that folds forward onto the occupant rather than saves them. JohnD also expressed "a Roll Over Bar without a diagonal is little more than decoration. LIke a cardboard box without any ends, it will fold up under stress." I believe he was referring to a cross diagonal brace (seen in the first photo below), but there are also roll bars being sold for the Triumph Spitfire that have no diagonal bracing back, so in the event of an accident they might simply rotate forward into the heads of occupants. Further to John's comments regarding Silverback, a very much modified Vitesse, I note he says "The front roll hoop was bent" in the crash. If you are unfamiliar with exactly what he's saying here's a photo of said car where you can see the front hoop just inside either windscreen post. Clearly that's not something usual in a road car's roll bar. And below is a 3/4 rear view showing, through the side window, the diagonal bracing into the back of the car. John's was at a good angle to prevent the roll bar folding forward. In most any 2-seater sports cars - and the length and that angle of those is very much less useful . . And here is the same after his crash . . . And while I accept these (plural) roll bars (..or are they linked to form a roll cage ?), along with a racing harness seat belt and crash helmet, may well have saved John's life, please don't be misled - this is unlikely to be the sort of roll-bar structure that you will be fitting into your everyday-use Spitfire. "So, BFG, the evidence is that you are wrong" is not supported by John's counter evidence of a purpose-built structure in a specially lightened race car ..with many well spaced mounting points, compared to what may be bought off the shelf. The comparison is simply not like for like. I do however concur that a well designed and quality assured roll bar, properly fitted to well conceived and structurally sound mounting places may be a life saver, in one accident in many million ! And I likewise wholeheartedly agree with John to buy from an engineering company with a solid reputation and a design specific to your model of classic car. But... again I see the item offered for the 1500 Spitfire, by the companies John recommended, have no diagonals (either transverse or into the back of the car) and also have their mounting plates very close together. I doubt it would take a huge amount of force (cantilevered by the bar's overall height) to buckle the lightweight bodywork it is bolted to. Again I offer these points of view just as food for thought. Pete.

Thank you, yes safe and well. My own thoughts regarding a roll-over bar or roll-cage are somewhat bias because since a child I've ridden a bicycle (..and still do), and then from the age of 16 I've ridden motorcycles (..and still do). Thereafter I built, drove and sold kit-cars made from wood, steel and fibreglass ..and inbetween times I've had a number of open cars including an early Spitfire, a TR3 (without a windscreen) and a TR4 (..and am about to buy another). And then I've also owned and extensively driven a number of lightweight (in particular a Triumph Herald and a number of Citroen A-series cars) that would crumple if sneezed at, let alone when driven over by a Chevrolet pickup truck (ref. the accident cited by John D.). If I recall I first had a license in 1974 and so I am no youngster, and still my two remaining best friends each ride bicycles on a daily basis. Having a roll cage around me or my dearest friends has not protected us for the past 50+ years 40+ years ago as I pulled up at traffic lights in my little white MkII Spitfire, alongside a lorry - I did (very consciously) realised how HUGE their tyres were and how monstrously heavy their vehicle was compared to the car I was driving ..with my exquisitely beautiful loved one in the passenger seat. Modern cars getting bigger haven't changed that one iota.! Even then though, I knew the greater risk was always in my making a mistake in going around a country lane corner too fast and ending up upside down in a ditch or a field (..that being aside from hitting a steadfast tree ). Again, those risks have not changed (either on motorcycle or in open-top car) and my being astutely aware of that - hasn't lured me into a false sense of security that a roll cage might suggest ..so I both ride and drive accordingly. As a retired Design Engineer I'd also have to advise that any roll-cage bolted to the body tub &/or wheel arches, rather than the chassis, is a waste of space. I'm about to buy another TR4 and have been seriously considering my fitting a roll cage ..versus the airiness and real life convenience of having somewhere to throw a camera bag, a coat &/or other touring necessities versus loosing the space to a steel cage, that may or may not protect you, depending very much on the type of accident. After all Construction and Use regulations say you must use e-marked light bulbs but say nothing to the effect that a motorcycle or car should have roll-over protection. Surely if it were a statistical imperative then they would insist that we protect ourselves ! As I'm exceptionally tall., the realities of having a full roll cage built-in would negate me from comfortably fitting in almost any sports car. My greater fear though is that I would crack my scull on the roll-cage during an accident.! A driver of a race car, wearing a helmet is far less at risk from such an injury but what about you and or your loved ones, either if the car is hit from behind or is it turned over.? This photo convinced me. . . ^ even without diagonal bracing of the roll cage, a car so configured would be totally useless to me when touring. I don't expect four seats in a sports car but in this example there's not even enough space to fit a man-bag, a camera case, nor barely a lady's purse. Might I also suggest you also take the petrol tank out of the car's interior (..such a terrible risk !) ..or otherwise fill it to the brim with high-grade petrol and invert it ..and see if it leaks all over the place.? That said, I do accept John's arguments and very much understand his earnest desire to offer good and sensible advice. I wouldn't even contradict him but I do ask ; has the risk actually changed so very much over the past 64 years ? .. I knew the risks then as I do now. Bigger cars driven by persons believing sat-nav are only a small percentage of the real risk - v - your making your own mistake ! Pete

Decent quality old n' scruffy second-hand tools are often better than new but cheap imports made of monkey metal. In my own case - I had worked in the US, and so I bought tools there. When i came back I then had duplicates. And then when my mum died, I inherited tools that had been my dads. He was an electrical technician in the RAF for 25 years and so he had an assortment in shapes and sizes, and at least one (long-nose pliers) made in some sort of high-grade brass. Of course they are all of professional grade. If I lived another lifetime I'd still not wear them out but I guess they'll be destined for the bin when I die .. so I'll leave a provision in my will that all my tools are to go to TWAM (tools with a mission < here > ) or a similar charity which ships used but good tools and equipment out to developing countries so that local people can earn a livelihood. I earnestly ask all you old-timers do the same.! Perhaps TWAM might be a charitable initiative picked up by and publicised by the combined Triumph clubs ? ( Triumphs with a mission ?? ) Pete

Here's a simple but surprisingly often useful mod.. for reaching into places like this. . . ^ the fastening (on this occasion a 5/16" Whitworth nut) is a couple of inches in from the edge of the electrical box on my old Sunbeam m/c, and the regulator is far too close for my fingers to get in there. I used to use masking tape or Blu-tack to hold the nut into an open-ended spanner, but these pliers are very much quicker and convenient, and because they are very slim - there's better visibility around them. Many such situations occur where a skinny long nose pliers can reach into where fingers cannot - but the angle between the open jaws of the pliers are wrong to get a secure grip on a nut, so out with the grinder ... ^ they now grip reliably. And yes they do work across and assortment of different size of nut ..and washers too. I did this early in the year and, like many other tools, these pliers hang on a peg-board ready and convenient for use. Quick n' handy, they've proved invaluable on so many occasions that I'd now be back to fumbling around without them. Pete. p.s. to avoid confusion.. I use these pliers to position the nut so the bolt's thread can be started ..but I do use a spanner to do it up. ..and yes, a pinch of Blu-tack may still used when a washer needs to be held in place over the nut.

Vehicle regulations have been in place for many years, for example my 1948 motorcycle was built without a rear brake light. In or about 1949 the law changed and brake lights were compulsory, and any motor vehicle used on British roads were required to have them fitted and working, even if they weren't originally. Construction and Use regulations were introduced to ensure that vehicles were built to approved standards, not only on the road but also in the event of many sorts of accident. And MOT's were introduced to ensure the growing number of road vehicles were maintained to a safe standard. British Standards together with the motor industry set the standards, and they of course recognised that a part fitted to one vehicle might not work so well in another. Things like lamps being manufactured by non-vehicle making companies (the likes of Lucas, Wipac, Dunlop, and a million others) were assigned marks and approval numbers ..after the product or part had been tested. This was to ensure that things like bulbs didn't burst into flames ! ..and their reflectors or lenses didn't melt from the heat of the bulb, or splinter and hurt people in an accident. And of course each of those manufacturers were liable for the safety and quality of their products. As indeed is any retailer who tries to sells non-approved parts. In short, the regulations are there for our, and of course pedestrian's safety. Why disregard them ? If a brake pad material is not approved for road use, it may well be because it doesn't work reliably when cold. According to the scrutineer that may be acceptable on a racing track and for experienced drivers, but when your wife or child drives your car and the brakes are cold and don't work well - then you are responsible for the vehicle and their safety. No ? This is irrespective of what an insurance assessor might decide ..because by then the incident and damage has happened.

Perhaps there's room for improvement in brake cooling via ducts.? In a previous life, I was called to make up ducted plates for a race car (not a Triumph but the same principles apply) which took 'fresh' / cooler air from the front of the car. Naturally your choice of wheels can likewise make a big difference to the amount of air getting to the brake disc and calipers. Not intending to be flippant, but the simplest (and cheapest) solution is of course to slow down and then to stop occasionally ..to allow things too cool down, both for the engine oil uphill and for the brakes on a long downhill. ie., think to drive according to the conditions as anyone on the 1970's or before would do. It is worth remembering that one of the beauties of being in the mountains is that the air is much cooler than in the plains ..which is why the Spanish migrate to them for their holidays. Pete

Clearly you're a bright fella to have in the workshop

^ just wondering like ..what he he said when he first saw you as a scrawny bright-pink new born ..that is before your mother insisted that your name would be Doug.

Plum is a great name.. Like yourself I find naming a vehicle isn't necessarily based on 'its' registration number, for example my '66 S-type Jaguar was beautiful, exceedingly elegant and tbh dressed in red - a Flirt ! ..and so that became her affectionate pet name. Conversely, a 1955 Sunbeam motorcycle I sold just a couple of years ago was registered HVS and so was known as 'Hovis' ..quite appropriate for the era. Another bike came from Renfew (Scotland) and so that name stuck. Both my present 1953 Sunbeams each have the registration NXN and there was no way I would name a British motorcycle Nixon ! ..so I was pondering about this on the way back from collecting her, taking her home with me inside my Chrysler Voyager. The bike's front wheel was poking through between the driver and passenger seat, and as the drove back the wheel gentle nudged against my elbow. It was just like a little old grandma, a little excited in the back seat going out for a jolly ride, nudging me when she wanted to say something. The name 'Nudge' stuck. Six months later I brought home her sister, which is also NXN. Although also a '53 Sunbeam, she is the S7 model with fat tyres. Perhaps a little teasingly she became known in the family as 'Pudge '. I also owned a very sad looking project bike (yet another Sunbeam) and she was known as 'Grudge '. And so it goes on. I had fourteen motorcycles and two classic cars at one time so naming them was the only way we could keep track of what we were talking about. They are all feminine, but perhaps that only because it sounds less daft to me ..being affectionate towards the fairer sex. Mind you - they can also be bloody obstinate ..in only the way 'the fairer sex' can be. ! I did however have a military-green coloured BMW at one time who was a Herman. I had a huge respect for the power and stance of that bike, but not a lot of affection. It was very much a He. Pete

Belated happy birthday wishes to Plum.! Of course, it was not usual (..in my family) to celebrate ones own registration certificate with the Office of Births and Deaths, nor even the day we might have been Christened - so why celebrate the registration date of your car ? That said.. I do with my old bikes Pete

Thanks, So the racing Le Man Spitfires had no side-window gutters. And, for weight saving. the fastback side and rear windows were fixed (and most likely perspex or similar) with no opening (hinges, gutters, seals, etc). The doors were gutted of winder mechanisms and their glass replaced with fixed aluminium frames with lightweight plastic windows. From the colour photo it looks as if the hardtop / fastback was also fixed and faired-in to the windscreens header rail - so it was not lift off, nor was there any other external access to the behind-the-seats interior of the car - That being unnecessary because these cars were not used for rallying ..and so carrying a spare was unnecessary. All that was within the fastback space would have been the roll cage and the fuel tank. Cheers.

Those two three posts just go to highlight what a master Michelotti was. What a superb piece of design. Lister I believe also did a cam tail design, which if I recall was neater that the Bond. edit ; can't find a Lister racing Triumph, only the Sunbeam Alpine.. seems like me ol' grey matter is going silver too. !