chrishawley

It's a very good question as to what exactly the cowls are made of. Not steel, obviously. But not Mazak either since they never rot in the 'spotty' mazak-like way. If a cowl had a chip in a non-stressed area then an metallic expoxy filler/bonder would make a good reapair. Common products of this sort in England are JB Weld and QuickSteel. Milliput (much loved buy aquarium owners) is similar. Pretty tough and can (within limits) be drilled and tapped. These are not the same as metallised body fillers (e.g. Alusoft) which are ordinary body fillers but with a aluminium powder added to make them tougher and less water-permeable than ordinary talc-based fillers: But a body filler nonetheless. If it's a stress fracture (typically the inner corner) then situation is more difficult. There's nothing that can be applied which will prevent the fracture from reappearing some time later. The cowls can be welded (I have had it done) but requires a skillful welder with the right grade of filler rods. If replacement is the best option I wouldn't be that much put off by damaged thread or studs. Helicoil might not be feasible but there's plenty of other threading solutions such as Time-Sert or, where the outer stud is concerned, simply aralditing a stud into the remants of the previous hole. Perhaps the bigger problem with second hand cowls is that they don't fit, having developed a 'set' in their previous life. I've leant (the hard way!) to always try and conserve the vehicle's existing fittings whever possible. Hope that's some ideas.

Good refurbishment of plastic items can be effortful and not inexpensive. Such items can be tarted up with one-step rattle can 'plastic' products (e.g. Hycote, Humbrol, Plastickote): Reasonable finish, not particularly durable but will do for some things. Clean item, lightly key with fine Scotchbrite, spray and hope for the best. But for a really good result I'd suggest the following: • Key the item all over (400g paper) • One good coat of adhesion promoter • A light coat of primer - one pack, rattle can, will do. Black primer if the final finish is to be black. • Scotchbrite, fine grade, all over • Then two-pack paint (same as for body panels) . If black then the blackest blacket is Jet Black RAL 9005 • Once fully cured polish to a final finish. Hmmmm. That's all well and good as a counsel of perfection but that's not far short of £100 just on materials (!!!!) and needs spray equipment. Not sure I've been remotely helpful here, but perhaps it will stimulate other ideas.

Obviously there's no one 'right' way to mask a wheel but here's one I like. masking a wheel for painting.pdf

As a diagnostic procedure I'd suggest to completely disconnect the linkages from the carburettors. The butterfly on each carb (independently) should then be able to snap shut decisively. If one or both does not do this then the carb(s) need further investigation. If carbs are fine then the issue lies somewehere between the accelarator pedal and the carb. And possible checks here are: • pedal return spring absent, incorrect, worngly fitted. and aslo worth a check that the pivot (bush) for the pedal is free moving. • cable internally kinked and corroded (should be totally free running) or incorrect length • then there's the Wallace and Grommit linkage screwed to the inlet manifold. The linkage mechanism can be 'flipped over' from the proper working state to one that has obstructed movement. Hard to explain but pretty obvious is the linkage is removed for examination.

For something that's handy and off-the-shelf then Halford's 'Silver Wheels' is pretty good. It's not too fussy about what base it's applied on (including bare metal) and can be lacquered for a bright finish or left unlacquered for a mid-satin finish. It's not a bright silver, so fits in well with the look of 60 - 70s vehicles. There's also Halfords 'Steel Wheels' but that really is dark- more like a pewter. So for a tenner or so might be a way to smarten up wheels + rocker cover.

Having found out that generic milkstone remover is just as good as branded Jenolite as a phosphoric rust treatment another question arose as to the effectiveness of generic citric acid. Picture shows a heavily rusted piece immersed in citric acid solution, with a strength of about half a cup to a pint, for 24 hours at an ambient temerature of about 10 degrees C. Rather exceeded my expectations but I don't happen to have any branded product with which to compare. Might other members have an impressions as to whether 'generic citric' is just as good as markedly more expensive branded products?

After much chicken-and-egging with re-doing wheels I got introduced to an efficient order of events. Namely: 1) Remove old tyre 2) De-rust (blasting or other method) with particular attention to beads, fix kerbing damage 3) Prime lightly but sufficiently with anti-rust primer (e.g. bondaprimer or similar) 4) Paint reverses of lips/bead area with any silver (or other colour to taste) 5) Fit tyre 6) Then proceed to the actual business of painting the wheel This way round avoids having to take a brand new tyre on and off just for painting. Although removal is unlikely to damage a new tyre the refitting process very likely damages the new and soft paint even with the greatest care. The trick(s) to painting a wheel with tyre on are to partially deflate the tyre so the tyre relaxes away from the rim and nifty use of masking tape. The niftiness is hard to describe so I'll see if I can get a photo later on.

Don't know about expert but where GT6mk3 and Spit IV/V are concerned the frame is the same. Only difference might be in the grain of the trim (coarse v. fine and depending on year). Earlier Spitfires (I, II, IIi) had a slightly different frame with markedly bowed legs rather than the 'straight' legs of the IV and V. But, I think (but not particularly sure), GT6s all had the straight legs including Mk1 and Mk2. I don't think the relevant body dimensions ever changed so in terms of 'fit' all would be interchangeable. Hopefully another member will chip in to confirm, disconfirm or refine the above.

Here we go; 'photos as promised. #1: Non-insulated terminal: Yup, happy enough with that. #2: Pre-insulated using a non-ratchet 'W' toothed tool. Absolutely secure but looks horrid. #3: The tool and #4 using the tool #5: Result: Frail and easily dislodged wire. I'm happy with any critique. Guess I'm coming round to think that uninsulated terminals are just the better option for general application on classic vehicles.

Many thanks for various ideas. Most helpful. To nail this one down I'll see if my camera's up doing a few super-macro photos. Perhaps such would shed light on whether 'operator error' is the real issue here!!

With the Eclipse tool it's mostly lack of any real secure grip on the wire even if the strands are folded back. With the 'stripping' type tool it's grip at the expense of a mangled blue bit (mostly blues I'm using) all crushed and flattened. Looks appalling!

Time to admit defeat! I can't find a good method or tool for crimping pre-insulated spade connectors (PISC) in a way that's both tough and pleasing to the eye. I've got supposedly the correct tool (an Eclipse) but the results are dismal. Classic 'Lucar' type spades - no problem. Got the tool for that and every one comes out hunky dory. But PISCs defeat me: I'd very much welcome any advice or suggestions. Many thanks in advance.

Please ignore colours of wires in photo as these are wrong, but note fitting. The metal bracket is held to the reverse of the dash by two tiny (No.2 or No.4) woodscrews. The switch, once wired, is pushed in from the front and sits, rather than clicks, into the bracket. It always looks a bit wrong because the switch has no escutcheon - but that's how is was! So it could well be that the 'LEFT' switch is in fact correct. Also attached are a couple of photos nicked from ebay (but that listing will disappear in a few minutes). Wiring up can be tricky because incorrect connections lead to all kinds of strangeness: But with a loupe it should be possible to see the terminal numbers moulded into the plastic by each terminal and, if the switch is correct, these will correspond with those on the wiring diagram.

Yes. That concords with my experience that on the GT6 the outer waist seal clips are best fitted working from the inside of the door with glass either fully up or dropped off its runner sitting in the bottom. Generic waist seal does not usually have the 'lumps'; but if present the front one does indeed need to be excised in order for the seal to be able to fit between the door skin an q-light frame. Original waist seals GT6 were made already shaped to fit around the q-light. But since these are no longer made 'shaping' the seal has to be done by hand. A very tricky thing to get looking just right: Needs an absolutely fresh, sharp, blade and ideally a couple of practises on scrap sections if available. As I recall the front of the strip along the q-light does not have clips but relies on being nipped in place between QL and door aided by a dab of adhesive.

Most instructive. I think it's the numbers in the left cartouche that matter suggesting manufacture in the 50'th week of 2008 (50-08). Had much the same issue on my BIL'S Peugeot 207 with '07' tyres all round; Passed the MOT but were absolutley (insert suitable demotic word). On replacement with some RainExperts the road behaviour was markedly improved. I want to let out a cri du coeur: Tyres are the only thing that hold the car to the road - don't compromise!

Opinions may vary; but here's my experience.... Overpainting: Gravitex or indeed another other non-waxy stone chip protect can be overpainted with pretty much anything provided it is absolutely fully cured and this takes a long time at winter ambient temperatures. The consequence of overpainting a not-fully-dried stonechip can be a crazed sticky mess as the thinners in the overcoat 'wake up' the stone chip. Two pack paint over stone chip gives a gloss surface which can be made more so by going over with primer first. Primer will also help with colour match/blend esp. if the finishing colour is a light shade. Single packs (e.g. rattle cans) might need several coats to get a gloss surface. I've found brushable enamel (from Paintman) to work well on less visible areas like wheel arches and undersides of sills. Application: Applying stone chip over previous stone chip or body colour is fine provided the area is degreased and keyed up. But it would do just to confirm that the previous coating is not a bituminous or waxy underseal. The instructions for Gravitex say it can be applied to bare steel but that seems a bit optimistic and it's probably better that any bare metal recieves a primer first (etch, bondaprimer or whatever is one's favourite). Pretty much any coating adheres better if the base is scrupulously degreased and keyed up and I'd give emphasis to that with stone chip as much as anything else.

Tricky one. All runs well when warm but cold runninng very problematic. Is that correct? Can't say I have a firm idea as to cause but here's a couple of thoughts about possible investigations: • Remove air filters with gaskets. Then start engine. Any difference? • With air filters still removed scrutinise the cold-start linkages. All intact and not deformed hopefully. With choke cable being operated check that both jets are being pulled down equally and that the action on the butterflys is equal. Cold start/running requires much enrichment so for large movement of the jets the butterfly movement should be pretty minimal. • Check carb pistons free moving and dash pots have adequate oil. • Examine breather hose from rocker cover to carbs. Splits or cracks may not be easy to see but as a test the relevant ports can be blanked off just temporarily to see of that has any effect. On HS8 carbs a ruse to investigate cold start/cold running problems is to wind down the jets by several flats to (what would be) a very over-rich condition for warm running. A 'postive' result to this test is then indicative of insufficient enrichment from the cold start mechanism. Not sure it's quite the same wit HS4s (e.g. Spitfire) but could be a possibility to try. But subject to starting off in a known good position for warm running. • Then there's a lead-removal test. If the engine can be persuaded to cold idle at all then remove plug leads in order, just one off at a time. If removal of a given lead does not worsen the running or cause stall then it points to a problem related to that cylinder of pair of cylinders. I'd concur with Pete that this is more likely about ancillary factors rather than a major engine issue.

The relationship between the the buffer cones and the catches can get quite complicated and long-winded: But leaving those complexities aside a simplification would be..... ...If the panel fit between the bonnet trainling egde to the scuttle and doors is good then is might be preferable to adjust the catch striker plates rather than the cones. The striker is held by two 1/4 unf setscres (7/16th AF socket) and if loosened a quarter of a turn allow for quite a good range of up/down movement. A few minutes experimentation should find a position where the catches close with a comfortably firm feel, but not tight or bound up. What can happen is that adjusting the tension on the catches to be firm enough can upset the alignemnt of the bonnet in which case more detailed adjustments are needed. But for now let's assume that won't be the case.

I can imagine quite a lot of deconstruction being required to put that right and there could be a number of factors affecting the situation. The foot of the wing where it joins the presents many challenges: Colin has mentioned wings to which I'd add that repro sills are often imprecise in their dimensions (too 'skinny'). Another aspect is that when a wing is removed the B-post face (where the striker plate fits) is not very rigid and does not provide a definite datum for where the wing should sit and also the bottom of this panel may have to have had welded repairs. Then there's the inner sill and floor pan and whether any repairs there have been 'brought up short' causing pull-in. So indeed wide area investigation (e.g. DA) is very much in order. For myself I'd want to determine first whether the sill has been repalced. The witness to this is usually that the front upper edge of the sill where it abuts the side scuttle shows a row of lap welds or tack welds (as opposed to the original spot welds of which there were seven I think). Then, much as you've done with the timber I'd check the truth of sill along the lower edge and with the bright finisher removed: It should be dead straight both in plan and elevation from front the back. If banana'd in either plane then that's going to an issue in making repairs. Here's hoping that a reveal with a DA and does not show too many horrors.

As per above, there can be several ways to deal with this sort of situation but certainly threaded inserts (Helicoil, V-coil etc) can be a good choice. One thing to take into account is the diameter to depth ratio. If the diameter of the fastener is 5/16 then the minimum depth of the material into which the insert is being made must be 5/16 + 'a bit'. If an insert hangs out of one end of the hole it won't bite securely. So the minimum material depth for a 5/16 hole is probably about 7/16 inches. Off the shelf coil kits tend to come with 1.5D inserts (i.e the length is one and a half times the diameter of the insert) - the 'stubbiest' insert is usually a 1.0 which might need to be purchased separately. Thread inserts are very easy to use; but if new to them it can be worth doing a couple of practice runs on something scrap just to get the feel.

Indeed so: FZX1258 was the HS4 for Spitfire 1500 and Dolomite 1500 years 1976 - 77. Off the top of my head I would have expected a 1975 Spitifre 1500 to have the AUD665 specified carb; not that that's much of a difference - plain jet as opposed to the later Waxstat jet. Waxstats can be problematic and are often disabled or replaced with the early jet.

Handy. Thanks.

Thanks for the pointer on this. I had a comparable experience over the last couple of weeks: Underside of wings media blasted, then phosphated, then primed then stone protected. When dry some areas flaked off: The primer hadn't adhered to the metal due to, seemingly, excessive phosphate residue. Cleaned up, repainted and all fine. Would I be right in thinking that Raptor is not a direct-to-metal coating but requires etch or epoxy primer as as base?

Is https://www.mgv8parts.com/product/v8-exhaust-manifold-downpipe-nuts/ any good as an option?

Glad you've got a remedy. But I had a comparable experience today: Job was to epoxy primer a very large panel. Of which some was bare metal, some was good metal with a waft of BondaPrimer, and some corners had filler in with traces of 1k primer and colour that had been used for guide coating. As it was drying I could just see hairline cracking in the 1k areas; nothing tragic and they'll flat out ok, but just a clue that epoxy is not quite as 'unreactive' as might be supposed. I'll see how it is in the morning, but maybe the learning point is that epoxy really does have to be applied as the root coat and not on top of other stuff. Hmm.