KevinR

A bit of a drive, but JY Classics get good reviews : http://www.jyclassics.co.uk/ However, a word of caution when dealing with body work - it gets expensive, especially when you get inside and find hidden rust. It's difficult to know when to stop.

Simple answer - YES. The main difference is that the 1600 box doesn't have synchromesh on 1st gear, whereas the 2 litre boxes do. So if you can live with crunching into first, or double declutching on the down change, then no problem at all. I'm sure that Pete Lewis will chip in with any other details of minor differences.

Try it again now, hopefully you will find the limit lifted

Outside the car : Jack both sides of rear of car up and secure on axle stands Remove both wheels Unbolt the spring from the top of the vertical links Inside the car : Remove the cockpit trim panel covering the front of the petrol tank Remove the spring bolt access panel Loosen the four spring retaining nuts, then one at a time "double nut" them and remove the complete stud from the diff. Back outside the car : Pull the spring out from which ever side you favour. Top tip, if working in a confined space, make sure there is enough room to pull the spring out.

The collapsible spacers (156903) are still available, so the 3.63 diff should be easily rebuildable. You can also drill and tap the extra two spring mounting holes in the case of the 3.63 if you need to

I suspect that you will find 99% of the parts are identical, and you should treat it as though it was a GE 13/60 GE Engine as it would appear that the ancillaries are the original Herald 13/60 ones. The clutch will be identical between a Spitfire MK3 (FD engine) and a Herald 13/60 with a GE engine. Plug gaps identical, points gap identical, tappet gaps identical. Timing should always set "by ear", so the original Triumph settings are only a starting point and bear no relationship with what they need to be for modern low octane unleaded fuel.

From a previous question, I suspect that David has a herald 13/60. Nothing wrong with an FD numbered engine instead of the GE numbered engine - technically it is superior as it has a better camshaft (if the original cam for the FD engine is still present) At the age the car is, anything could have happened to the car and the engine - for example, is it fitted with a single carb or twin carbs, and is the distributor a Lucas one or an AC Delco one with a rev counter drive. What you will need to do is to get the V5c updated with the new engine number - send it with a letter to the DVLA saying that the engine that is currently fitted was present when you bought the car. With cars of this age they don't get hung up about needing details of where the engine came from - and the FD engine size is identical to the GE engine size.

Although it doesn't show a Triumph door, the concept is similar to that illustrated in this VW article. http://www.vw-resource.com/plastic_sheet.html Rather than using Blue tac as the VW article suggests, I would use butyl mastic tape (which is specifically designed for the job - http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/BOLT-ON-PANEL-SEALER-BUTYL-TAPE-ROLL-STRIP-SEALANT-BONDING-CARS-BOATS-VANS-/221533973105?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_3&hash=item3394742a71

Chris, The MKIV Spitfire has a 3 rail 4 synchro box, so it is conceivable that the very last Heralds were also fitted with a 4 synchro box. In the Spitfire world, the single rail box was introduced with the UK/European Spitfire 1500. In the USA, the MKIV Spitfire got a 1500 engine in 1972/3 - a good 18 months earlier than UK/Europe, and the early US 1500's had 3 rail boxes, and got the single rail box at the same time as the UK/European 1500 was introduced. I'm not too familiar with the Dolomite range, so I'll leave it for someone else to say when the 3 rail 4 synchro Dolomite box was introduced.

On an Android tablet, the "right click" is achieved by pressing and holding on the screen, and what would have appeared for a right click appears. To embed the image, manually enter the IMG tags. Open square bracket IMG close square bracket before the image URL, and open square bracket /IMG close square bracket at the end of the image URL. This was posted from my android.

Duplicate threads now merged into one

There is no limit to the number or size of pictures you can post in your "Gallery" - the link is at the top of the page. You don't have to shrink them, although if you don't have high speed broadband you might want to to reduce the upload time ! Once posted in your gallery, linking them into your postings is very easy on a PC, but I haven't yet cracked if for a tablet as there is no "right click" on a tablet. 1. Right click on the image in the gallery and there will be a popup with four size options (thumbnail, small, medium, large) and "direct link to this image file". 2. Hover over the "direct link to this image file" and right click. 3. On the dropdown menu, select "Copy shortcut" - you've now got the URL of the image stored in your paste buffer. 4. Return to your posting, and at the point where you want to insert the image, click the "image" button at the top of the text entry window (11th icon along on the 2nd row) 5. When the popup box appears, paste the shortcut copied at step 3 into the URL box. 6. Click OK, and the image will appear. If it is too big, try the same trick with the "small", "medium" or "large" versions available when you right click on the image in the gallery. If you want to use the "small", "medium" and "large" versions, then left click on one of them and do the "right click, copy shortcut" stuff in the next window. You can work with your gallery open in one tab, and the main forum open in another, so it is easy to toggle between the two.

Posting pictures from your gallery (link at the top of the page) is simple on a PC, I haven't yet cracked if for a tablet as there is no "right click" on a tablet. 1. Right click on the image in the gallery and there will be a popup with four size options (thumbnail, small, medium, large) and "direct link to this image file". 2. Hover over the "direct link to this image file" and right click. 3. On the dropdown menu, select "Copy shortcut" - you've now got the URL of the image stored in your paste buffer. 4. Return to your posting, and at the point where you want to insert the image, click the "image" button at the top of the text entry window (11th icon along on the 2nd row) 5. When the popup box appears, paste the shortcut copied at step 3 into the URL box. 6. Click OK, and the image will appear. If it is too big, try the same trick with the "small", "medium" or "large" versions available when you right click on the image in the gallery. If you want to use the "small", "medium" and "large" versions, then left click on one of them and do the "right click, copy shortcut" stuff in the next window.

It could be the earth wire for the horn

It's simple, on a PC, I havn't yet cracked if for a tablet as there is no "right click" on a tablet. 1. Right click on the image in the gallery and there will be a popup with four size options (thumbnail, small, medium, large) and "direct link to this image file". 2. Hover over the "direct link to this image file" and right click. 3. On the dropdown menu, select "Copy shortcut" - you've now got the URL of the image stored in your paste buffer. 4. Return to your posting, and at the point where you want to insert the image, click the "image" button at the top of the text entry window (11th icon along on the 2nd row) 5. When the popup box appears, paste the shortcut copied at step 3 into the URL box. 6. Click OK, and the image will appear. If it is too big, try the same trick with the "small", "medium" or "large" versions available when you right click on the image in the gallery. If you want to use the "small", "medium" and "large" versions, then left click on one of them and do the "right click, copy shortcut" stuff in the next window. This is the "direct link" version This is the small version

No need to shrink it, just post it in your gallery (link at the top of the page) and then link it in to you post. See http://forum.tssc.org.uk/index.php?/topic/11-picture-size/ for how to do it.

If it was a GT6, with telescopic shock absorbers fitted, then the drive shaft should never be able to rub on the chassis if the correct length shocks have been used. If you have the telescopic conversion kit fitted, then it should have been supplied with the correct "short" shocks to stop the drive shaft rubbing, but many of the kits are supplied with shocks that are too long and allow the drive shaft to rub the chassis when the suspension is at full extension. If the car is still fitted with lever arm shocks, then they may or may not stop the driveshafts from rubbing - it may be worth getting a telescopic conversion kit. If the joint between the lower wishbone and the bearing housing upright has seized (and they do with monotonous regularity), then the suspension could be non functional and effectively seized with the drive shaft very close to the chassis and hence the rubbing. You need to check the clearance between the chassis and the drive shaft when the car is sitting on the ground, and not jacked up with the wheels in the air. You need to make sure that the gap is even on both sides.

Andy, The BBC story is an old story. The insurance companies concerned got such a slating when the story broke, I think they changed their position - it was born out of ignorance at the call centres, where the call centre monkeys didn't know how to handle the calls about tyre changes and just assumed it was a modification. I have used winter tyres on my cars for the last 20 years, and I have only once told them, and that was when I couldn't get V rated winter tyres in the right size - that was about 19 years ago and they were cool about it back then. The way I view it now, and would argue it via the ombudsman if required is that I don't have to tell them when I change my "all year" tyres from one brand to another, or whether I use budget ditch finders or premium super doper ones, that all meet the original car manufacturers specification - a wide range of tyres with different tread patterns and rubber compounds - then I also don't need to tell them when I fit tyres with a cold temperature optimised rubber compound and snow/ice/slush grip optimised tread pattern "winter tyres", or high temperature optimised rubber compound and minimal tread pattern "Summer tyres", so long as the basic specification (size & speed rating) matches or exceeds that specified by the car manufacturer.

So you are going to trade regularly going to the filling station to have a minor walletectomy, for less frequent visits for a major walletectomy.

I've suffered the condenser fault on a Ford engine - engine idles nicely, but as soon as you demand power it starts misfiring and nearly dies.

"Winter" tyres perform superbly in the snow and ice and wet winter roads. Grip on dry cold roads is also superb, and in the winter, even the cheapest winter tyre will outperform the most expensive "summer" tyre under most normal driving conditions. "Winter" tyres can be used in the summer without any particular issues, as long as you are prepared to accept a higher than normal wear rate, and don't expect them to maintain high grip levels when driving the car at the extremes. I run winter tyres on my daily driver, and sometimes keep them on through the summer - in the winter thy only work properly on snow covered roads when they have at least 4mm of tread remaining, so if I have a set that are down to 4mm at the end of the winter, I keep them on through the summer so I don't waste the last 2.4mm of tread.

It looks to me like someone has modified an Overdrive lock-out switch to work as a reverse light switch instead - clever !

I have never ever found a set of wiper blades that can wipe the entire sweep of a Spitfire screen satisfactorily - even when the cars were new the blades supplied with the car couldn't do it. The TEX blades and arms are the most authentic looking ones that can be obtained and are a very good copy of the ones that the car would have had originally. All the modern wiper blades with the multiple squeegee edges just don't look right on an old car, so I am more than happy with the TEX blades and arms. If I was worried about seeing properly in the rain, then I'd put RainX on the screen rather than having an ugly modern wiper blade - that still wont conform to the shape of the screen. P.S. I've also moved the topic to the Club Shop section of the forum

The best way to check is to apply for a BMHIT certificate - just google it for a link. You supply the Commission number and pay the required fee and a few days/weeks later you get a certificate with all the data transcribed from the original production records for the car.

http://home.btconnect.com/stadiumcp/Instructions/Sparkrite/SR75-H.pdf