Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

When fitting the alternator on my gt6 I have found it fouls the new engine valance panels bought from the club shop. đŸ˜©đŸ˜©Shortening the fan belt is not an option as the alternator is prevented from recoiling very far thanks to the cast mounting bracket being in the way.    The GT6 bracket is quite long and lowers the alternator -I have no idea why.   But I see the TR6 mounting bracket appears to be quite a bit different and may sort out my problem.   Any ideas why and any reason I shouldn’t use the tr6 bracket instead? 

couple of links showing the difference below:

 
 
Any advice much appreciated.
 
Rich
Posted

The alternator mounting bracket on nearly all small Triumph engines is the same, whether it be Spitfire, Toledo, 2000 or TR. The GT6 is the exception because fitting the alternator on the normal bracket would foul the bonnet.

Posted

The side valences are probably made to the original spec which was for dynamo, which sits higher than the alternator. (It's possible the alternator is fitted lower so as not to foul the bonnet when it's closed, being bigger and broader than the dynamo.)

When I bought my valences I had to modify the top of the passenger side to allow the alternator to sit on the correct brackets, ands this little cut-out allows for quite a bit of adjustment on the belt.

DSCF8045.jpg.d218fb37da1cd80ef13841a27cec4ea7.jpg

 

Posted
5 hours ago, Pete Lewis said:

just what alternator are you fitting as the various makes have variation in their lower mounts

pete

 

The standard GT6 alternator what ever that is.

Like Colin, I think I’ll have to modify the valance which is quite annoying as these are the new ones the club shop have recently had manufactured and they are powder coated.  Grrrr.

incidentally, the ‘new’ fan vowel will also have to be modified as there is no way it will join the side valances without pressing hard against the rad at the top - which can’t be right.

I did mention all these problems to Angie but she said that no one else has fed back đŸ˜©đŸ˜©đŸ˜©

Posted

so i hazard a guess its a lucas A127 or similar the only thing to keep an eye on is the tail mount  this has a tight fitting tube /bush inserted. it is very important 

the lug is equally spaced with bush showing each side or the lug

this is due to wild case expansion due to heat , if the lug is all one end it will very soon break it off 

im sure Doug did a bit of faf and fettling on some side shields 

Pete

Posted

The original fitment alternator was the Lucas ACR 15 according to the parts book. Interestingly, the parts book also shows the valances without any cut outs, which is endorsed by image 8.22 in John Thomason's Guide to Originality, so something is wrong with the replacement parts.

Gully

Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, Pete Lewis said:

so i hazard a guess its a lucas A127 or similar the only thing to keep an eye on is the tail mount  this has a tight fitting tube /bush inserted. it is very important 

Hi Pete. Is that bush supplied  and fitted with the alternator.

Dave

Edited by daverclasper
Posted

YES  its part of the unit ,if it needs one it will have one  , 

eg, with no tube/bush the hole will be far too large

not a good pic but this  shows the type of rear sliding bush in the rear lug 

images?q=tbn%3AANd9GcTIDSzvm3tEe8nZkwG9-UQCkhT-gJWdpFK_Ll4Rf3gZ9oATzOS5d92RbmFag3JlQaiyP1kKCVw&usqp=CAc

the lug needs to be central on the bush 

pete

Posted
1 hour ago, Gully said:

The original fitment alternator was the Lucas ACR 15 according to the parts book. Interestingly, the parts book also shows the valances without any cut outs, which is endorsed by image 8.22 in John Thomason's Guide to Originality, so something is wrong with the replacement parts.

Gully

It's probable that the valences are fine, photo on left below (mine were altered to take an oil cooler and a non-standard alternator originally, and the currently fitted version is a 55amp uprated replacement ) and it's the bracket that Rich is using that's the problem, especially if it differs from the others he's looked at - it may be lowering the alternator a shade too far. It's interesting however that the photo of the aftermarket alloy versions to the right below also shows the top edge cut out for the alternator, although not as drastically as mine. Space is at a premium and the slightest deviation may cause fitting problems.

123419355_shop-gt6-240135.JPG.6796793d87cf4748d8af9f64e751456b.JPG s-l640.jpg.860a690eff6010d83e0951bccc46faac.jpg

 

 

  • Like 1
Posted
34 minutes ago, Colin Lindsay said:

It's probable that the valences are fine, photo on left below (mine were altered to take an oil cooler and a non-standard alternator originally, and the currently fitted version is a 55amp uprated replacement ) and it's the bracket that Rich is using that's the problem, especially if it differs from the others he's looked at - it may be lowering the alternator a shade too far. It's interesting however that the photo of the aftermarket alloy versions to the right below also shows the top edge cut out for the alternator

My valances are the ‘very latest’ from the club shop - stainless steel, 

powder coated “total redesign” as the club shop catalogue puts it!!  Like the ones in Colin’s pic, they only have the lip removed at the point the alternator meets.

I should think the mount is right as there’s only 2 choices right? I see that all GT6 use the same one.

All GT6:  214268 (alternator)

everything else: 147899 (alternator)

incidentally, where do the valances connect to at the top front if you don’t have the radiator cowl like the yellow GT6 pictured?

thanks for all the input

Rich

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...