Ian Smith

Triumph manifold for SU single carb side-draught type currently going through 'Bay. I'd probably look at an HS4, or equivalent. Cheers, Ian. PS, Have a look on FB marketplace.

I've got mine up in the air at the moment, but it is just chassis, drivetrain & engine. (Newport ).

Another week at Smith Towers, and work isn't as quick as I'd like, but there we are. I'm currently being called away to house renovation and decorating. Still, parts continue to arrive, so it's not all bad. Maisie has gone up onto axle stands, and a lot of oiling bits & bobs, all on the rear suspension areas. I'd like to overhaul the rear portions first, and the diff is leaking through its seals, so it'll be probably the first stop. I've been giving a lot of thought about those Rotoflex couplings. I was taught a bit about fault finding in my earlier years, and one of those things was 'is it in right? Or, is the part in question operating beyond its design parameters? Hmm. Another niggle is the swept area of the Rotoflex.in relation to the rear shock absorber. Rimmers sell a neat little kit to extend past the shock cross member. A nice solution, except.. Rimmers are out of stock.... Another idea is to do away with the fouling action of the Rotoflex and shock absorber. This 'might' be achieved by inverting the rear hubs, which bring the bottom hub bolt to the top. Then, with a set of rose-jointed push rods & fulcrum swivel plates, we can install a single shock absorber with its attendant spring & safety lanyard. If you google Formula Vee, then you'll get the basic idea. Or, 'Zero Roll'. I should stress however, that it's still very early days indeed. There are certain problems I know are there, and it might come to naught, but I'll have a look, hopefully soon. Triumph owners will probably not go down this route, as it'll most probably compromise bodywork dimensions. However, building a special may allow me liberties that the average Triumph owner won't contemplate. I managed to purchase a rear spring for a MK IV spit this week, but it'll need a rebuild, especially the thrust buttons. I've got some feelers out for some companies who can turn these up in Delrin but once again, early days. No real photo's this week, unless you're axle-stand spotting, but hopefully some better ones to come. Cheers, Ian

I had this problem with a mini, a fair few years back: intermittent starting. A friend traced it back to the wiring on the ignition switch/column lock. Apparently, the live feed was ok, but the ignition feed, and starting feed were reversed. Changing this cured the problem. 30-odd years ago, mind... I think we've turned decimal since...... Cheers, Ian.

Welcome to the show. I'm down the road in Newport, with a GT6-based special in the early throes of rebuild/restore.

A bit of idle musing over here, but we used to buy new hub blanks, with the intention of drilling out to a new PCD. On that basis, one wonders if ne rear hub blanks can be bought to retro-fit the existing hubs to a (say, Ford ) PCD? Cheers, Ian.

Bartering at its very best!

I've got this as an upcoming job on my car. I wondered if mounting a new bolt into a lathe, centre, and drilling a small 2.5mm hole down the centre, with a cross drill operation at the point where the hub reaches it's middle length. Then, tap & install a suitable grease nipple into the hex portion of the bolt head. I've had to make similar jobs before, but this will be the first time for this particular application. Opinions, please? Cheers, Ian.

Does that actually work? I understand that the latest fizzy is toned down considerably. I've used old mineral-based engine oil, such as GTX. Cheers, Ian

if it's a marine based clamp, then it'll be (most probably ) LM2 grade Aluminium. Be a bit wary of too much heat at or about the threaded portion of your clamp. A little known fact about Aluminium is due to its alloy properties, it actually shrinks before expanding. The old maxim is:- "if it won't go one way, it'll go the other". Put the clamp into a vice and tighten with the threaded portion uppermost. Ensure the thread is scrupulously clean, and well lubricated. Using a small hammer and a block of wood, lightly tap the offending area, with the wood block behind the threaded portion. The force is about the same as cracking an egg. The block of wood is there to absorb the force of the tapping action. I don't know what releasing fluid you're using, but WD40 or Plus-gas should normally suffice. Try the clamp: One way, or the other? If you do have a little bit of movement, then oil that portion only, and repeat. I used to make up a mixture of LM grease & WD40, and brush it on. it might take a while, but you should end up with a working clamp. Finally, if you're using heat, beware of too much. Sledge hammers will also mean 'tears before bedtime'. Best wishes, Ian.

Hello Folks. Well, it's been a fortnight since she's arrived, what have I achieved? From the outside, not a lot, actually. However, I've managed to purchase a lot of the mechanical gubbins that go towards the car. Having taken a real good look at the chassis, I've decided to renovate the rear portion, specifically, from the Diff rearwards. There will be some possibly significant changes made to the front, so I might as well get the rear portions up to standard. I've had a look at the CV jointed conversion, and I must admit, sorely tempted. But! I've got several brand-new Rotoflex couplings stood by, so I'll try to use them first. If it doesn't work out, I can always go to plan B. Or, is it plan X..... One thing I'm currently looking at, is the brackets which hold the rear arms to the hub carriers. They're missing, but I know they're usually available, so no trouble. I assume that they connect to the tub of the vehicle; have I got that right? On the basis of that, I'll need to fabricate a couple of brackets to mount transversely to allow the (as yet ) missing rear arms. I'll be ordering some rear frame extensions from Rimmers for the shock absorber mounts. Tomorrow should see the car going up in the world... On a final note, these Rotoflex couplings. Oh dear! Cheers, Ian

Quite. One problem is manufacturers quantity If a unit producer makes X-thousand units, that's fine, But when you're down to a couple of hundred a decade, it can get problematic.

Well done Barry; pleased to see you resolved it.

Yes, I can understand all of that. Sad to say that you wouldn't expect things like engine mounts to fail. However, we live in different times, and whilst some things improve, some don't. My worry would be that a rigid mounting would set up problems further down the drive train.

Ok Barry, you've nailed the hydraulics (pardon the pun ). So, it's mechanical. Like others, I'd suggest it's the clutch release bearing. Or, the carrier for the bearing. Working back, you've got the clutch drive plate Pressure plate, release bearing & carrier. Fulcrum pin & arm Then we're onto the hydraulics, which you're happy with. Back to mechanics. Master cylinder to pedal box, Clutch pedal fulcrum. And that's about it... My money would be on the carrier being too short. Cheers, Ian.

I'm not too au fait with GT6 mounts (yet). However, rubber mounts are sometimes designed to be a 'design failure' part. Having a solid mount might lead to something more expensive further down the line. Hmmm. Naturally I'm interested in how this pans out. From what I've seen & read, it would appear that the current mounts are consumable items. As such, replaced on a 6,000-12,000 interval. Cheers, Ian.

I don't doubt the quality of the work of either yourself or the garage person. The clutch has 2 actions: a hydraulic action, and a mechanical linkage action. If you're satisfied that the hydraulic action is good, then it must be a mechanical link action. Another thing might have happened is the clutch cylinder to pedal clevis pin. The master cylinder rod locates either side of the pedal arm, with a clevis pin. Losing a pin like this means that the fork remains in place, but loses all of its work. Good luck, Ian.

Just a quick question on these Lidl/Parkside - Aldi/Ferrex cordless tools... Are these batteries interchangeable between brands? Or, are you stuck with just one variety? Cheers, Ian.

Hello Barry. I used to have a mini with he same problem:- Crunchy first & reverse. I found out that the clutch pipe hose was failing, when in use. Bleeding the clutch won't show up the fault, only in operation. Have an assistant to depress the clutch when you can inspect the quality of the hose. It took me a week to find it, and I had a complete new clutch stood by.... Argh!! Extending the slave operating rod is a possibility. For testing, try a longer rod (IE, an old bolt). This is for test only, I should suggest. The objective of the test should prove/not prove your clutch system is working. If you need to move the slave cylinder, there are ways & means to achieve that without too much trouble. For a last throw in, check the clutch pedal fulcrum is doing its job. If your pedal travel is taking up slack excessively... It's not an exhaustive list, but I hope you get to the problem. Cheers, Ian.

Having just read this thread, it occurred to me that I will have to commission a 'one-off' tank over here. Petrol delivers all sorts of crud into the tank, despite your personal desire to have things spot-on. I'm considering have some sort of flush through arrangement, whereby the user can fully drain the tank, and blow out the residue. I'm a bit too premature on this part of the project, but gaining information like this is priceless. Thanks Folks, Ian.

The person in question died of Crush Asphyxia, and coroner returned a verdict of accidental death. sad to say, I cannot feel any sympathy whatsoever.

Recent news over here, where a 'person' was crushed under a car whilst attempting to steal a cat.

Oh no, dear me. I'm not about to condemn Mr Kinnock. If it's OK with you, I'll stop the 'gas subject, 'cos we'll breach the grounds of common indecency.

Yes indeed. Mr Kinnock was, I believe, a trainee at Whiteheads, Newport. He had a few, and proceeded to demonstrate the the affect of an 'after-burner', which is-was performed without the added safety features of trousers. The gentleman witnessed the event, to whom he related to me. The reputation of said re-teller was cast iron, and as such, I would stake my own reputation on the story, as is. Sad to say, the gent concerned has since passed away.

It occurred to me that a cordless tool, such as a cream-crackered Ryobi multi-tool (other makes, both better & cheaper are available ) might be gainfully employed as a 'dumb' 18volt supply to supply things such as emergency lighting, etc. in todays world, such things are more of a distant memory, but thinking things like this allows the tight-fisted (who, me?) amongst us re-use the normally throwaway items. I've got two items here, both Ryobi. One is a multi-tool with a single function ( ie It doesn't work), and a strimmer which doesn't strim... Needless to say, with careful cutting, they both possess very suitable sockets for your battery of choice. I have a sneaking suspicion that these 'cheap' tools are actually quite good, as long as you remember that you don't exceed the rated capacity of the particular tool in question. Just looking at the 20V tools, which have a very passing resemblance to both Makita, and certain DeWalt models. That said, I haven't tried them myself yet. Cheers, Ian.