Mk2 Engine Rebuild going into a Mk1 GT6 by a novice!

[Nigel Clark]

3 minutes ago, Roger K said:

Out of interest - is a cam break-in procedure recommended for new cams installed in the six-pot?  It's very important at first fire-up in American V8s with flat-tappet cams, so I would presume it would be a good idea in a Triumph as these are also flat-tappet. 

Yes, use plenty of assembly lube on cam and followers. On first start up run the engine continuously for 20 mins at 2,000rpm. This beds in the cam and followers while providing plenty of lubrication.

Some cam suppliers may specify their own lube or a different start up procedure.

Nigel

[Roger K]

1 hour ago, Nigel Clark said:

Yes, use plenty of assembly lube on cam and followers. On first start up run the engine continuously for 20 mins at 2,000rpm. This beds in the cam and followers while providing plenty of lubrication.

Some cam suppliers may specify their own lube or a different start up procedure.

Nigel

Thanks Nigel, that is exactly my usual procedure so I will follow it again when I rebuild this motor.

[Andyone]

Hi all

I'm in the same position of rebuilding my TR6 lump which will be the first Triumph engine I've done so sorry fro hyjacking this thread but it might help later on.

Seems a bit counter intuitive at first start to run for 20mins at 2000rpm for a complete build.

If its a complete rebuild with rebore/pistons and rings etc then in the past I start the engine, quick check for leaks, check the timing and its out on the road to seat the pistons and rings by accelerating to 50mph or so and snapping the throttle shut coast down to 30mph or so and repeat 5/6 times to seat the rings check for leaks drive for 50 mile using the whole rev range and then change the oil.

The cam receives no special attention other than assembly lube (Clevite). if it was a retro fit to already running engine then yes I get the above. I wonder if triumph worried so much when the engine was first run? Or was it a case of simply use and change the oil after 500 miles or so.

So what takes precedence running in? The bottom end and the rest of motor or the cam?

Interesting to hear what others do for running in a completley rebuild engine like this post I suspect is going to be.

Andy

 

[AidanT]

Hi

A question on replacement bearings for you all

The +.010 + .030 etc, if your engine has been honed but not re-bored, can you fit any of these? Or must they be the std size only?

 

Thanks 

 

[Roger K]

The size or condition of the bores has no bearing on the crankshaft bearing sizes (no pun intended).

[Ian Faulds]

4 minutes ago, AidanT said:

Hi

A question on replacement bearings for you all

The +.010 + .030 etc, if your engine has been honed but not re-bored, can you fit any of these? Or must they be the std size only?

 

Thanks 

 

Hi, the honing removes nothing so standard rings, do check though that your engine hasn't been rebored before you got it. Then you would need to change size for size, but honing only cleans up the bores.crankshaft bearings are a separate thing entirely. 

[AidanT]

Thanks  realise my tech ical error there had have been rings!!!

Looks like the only option is for the machine shop to work this one out

Thanks 

Aidan

 

[Roger K]

On 23/01/2021 at 17:49, Andyone said:

 

Seems a bit counter intuitive at first start to run for 20mins at 2000rpm for a complete build.

The cam receives no special attention other than assembly lube (Clevite). if it was a retro fit to already running engine then yes I get the above. I wonder if triumph worried so much when the engine was first run? Or was it a case of simply use and change the oil after 500 miles or so.

So what takes precedence running in? The bottom end and the rest of motor or the cam?

 

If you have fitted a new cam and lifters, the break-in procedure is necessary.  If you're reusing the old cam and lifters it's not.  It's to do with work-hardening the lobes of a new cam.

I think modern materials and lubricants may have changed the process needed - I don't know what Triumph used to do, but I've seen too many V8s trashed with cam failure over the last few years to want to take the risk.  If fitting a new flat tappet cam (solid, like the Triumphs, or hydraulic like most V8s - but roller cams don't need it), my routine is to do the 20-min break-in at 2-2500rpm without stopping unless absolutely necessary, and then shut off without allowing it to idle.  Change the oil filter and run again, this time varying the revs, and fine-tuning the motor - maybe some jet changes with a fixed-jet four-barrel carb.  If OK I'll try to give it just four or five road miles, then drain the oil, change the filter, check the valve clearances (if solid), and retorque the heads if appropriate for the gaskets/studs used.  You don't need to do 500 miles before retorquing - just a couple of full heat cycles is enough.

Then, after 500 miles, another filter change and maybe oil as well.  And another filter change at 1000 miles.  The running-in process after that will depend on what bearing clearances etc. were chosen at assembly.

If the system's working properly, changing oil filters is more important than changing oil as any metal particles will be caught by the filter and should not be circulating.

Some will think this is overkill, but it all comes down to how much you've spent on the engine.

[Pete Lewis]

all sounds good but as triumph service says filter every other oil change  i would feel a few hundred miles wont in anyway overload over clog or allow particles through when running in un bedded engines take a modern ok maybe better tolerances better materials but i dont see any new vehicles even  having a running in oil change 

my citroen has its first service at 20k   ,different world to classics but there we go 

so it has the light  ring of overkill  its a preference or utopia decision once more 

Pete

[Roger K]

It is probably overkill as you say, and these are indeed different times.  Different machining clearances, different oil specs...

Just insurance on a new build, really.  Filters are cheap and give me peace of mind!

[Pete Lewis]

sleep well Roger    

freedom is round the corner 

a long way round the corner   Ha !

[Andyone]

On 14/02/2021 at 09:54, Roger K said:

If you have fitted a new cam and lifters, the break-in procedure is necessary.  If you're reusing the old cam and lifters it's not.  It's to do with work-hardening the lobes of a new cam.

I think modern materials and lubricants may have changed the process needed - I don't know what Triumph used to do, but I've seen too many V8s trashed with cam failure over the last few years to want to take the risk.  If fitting a new flat tappet cam (solid, like the Triumphs, or hydraulic like most V8s - but roller cams don't need it), my routine is to do the 20-min break-in at 2-2500rpm without stopping unless absolutely necessary, and then shut off without allowing it to idle.  Change the oil filter and run again, this time varying the revs, and fine-tuning the motor - maybe some jet changes with a fixed-jet four-barrel carb.  If OK I'll try to give it just four or five road miles, then drain the oil, change the filter, check the valve clearances (if solid), and retorque the heads if appropriate for the gaskets/studs used.  You don't need to do 500 miles before retorquing - just a couple of full heat cycles is enough.

Then, after 500 miles, another filter change and maybe oil as well.  And another filter change at 1000 miles.  The running-in process after that will depend on what bearing clearances etc. were chosen at assembly.

If the system's working properly, changing oil filters is more important than changing oil as any metal particles will be caught by the filter and should not be circulating.

Some will think this is overkill, but it all comes down to how much you've spent on the engine.

I'm in for changing the oil and filter given the investment rebuilding an engine.(PI 1969)

My cam is std from a new blank (Kent) and lifters/cam bearings are new along with pistons/rings and bearings. So the cam will need running in but I'm not sure running it static at 2000-2500 revs is going to help the piston rings seat. I'd normally start/warm, check for leaks then take a car straight out on the road take up to 50-60mph and snap the throttle shut coast down 5-6 times, granted newer cars than a TR6.

Andy

So from what you are saying cam first, bottom end second.

I wonder with the advances in machining if the tolerances on a well rebuilt engine are now better than those achieved 50 years ago even with old materials found in the block. Bearings are likely of better materials along with pistons/rings making running in less problematic. Triumph probably didn't spec for engines to last much more than 60K before some kind of rebuild. 

[Roger K]

2 minutes ago, Andyone said:

I wonder with the advances in machining if the tolerances on a well rebuilt engine are now better than those achieved 50 years ago even with old materials found in the block. Bearings are likely of better materials along with pistons/rings making running in less problematic. Triumph probably didn't spec for engines to last much more than 60K before some kind of rebuild. 

It's not the tolerances that have changed per se, it's the lubrication.  Modern oils are streets ahead of the old mineral oils with regard to film thickness and protection etc., so much closer tolerances can be used.  The last small-block Ford V8 I rebuilt dates from 1964 but was machined to modern clearances on the crank, so it was given a full ester synthetic 15W 50 right from the off.  No running-in necessary.  The old Mustang I posted a photo of on another thread didn't need a break-in as the 393 has a roller cam.

The cam break-in is entirely that, to protect the cam - nothing to do with the rings or running-in.

[Clive]

7 hours ago, Andyone said:

I wonder with the advances in machining if the tolerances on a well rebuilt engine are now better than those achieved 50 years ago even with old materials found in the block. Bearings are likely of better materials along with pistons/rings making running in less problematic. Triumph probably didn't spec for engines to last much more than 60K before some kind of rebuild. 

Sadly bearing material for our cars is not as good as it was. Vandervell VP2 were excellent, nothing else made today is as good.

Having rebuilt a handful of engines, I am really not certain that the King "HD"  bearings are any better than the cheaper type. 

Likewise, my experience of old stock Glacier bearings is very good, despite them not being tri-metal. 

The problem is that we are a small market, with little money to be made as volumes are low. And small chassis owners have been historically "careful" with spending, so that probably resulted in some manufacturers withdrawing from the market. It is only in recent years there has been wider interest in quality, though many are still buying on price. And the growth of cheaply made parts from "Lucas"  "borg and beck" etc. trying to appear quality by slapping the name of a once quality manufacturer on boxes then filling them with parts sourced from all over the world, probably based on price/minimum quality.

[Roger K]

Exactly that, couldn't agree more.

[johny]

You do have to bear in mind how the vast majority of classic cars are going to be treated and what their annual mileage will be. Some owners want an engine good for 200k and then do 500 miles a year☺️

[Clive]

15 minutes ago, johny said:

You do have to bear in mind how the vast majority of classic cars are going to be treated and what their annual mileage will be. Some owners want an engine good for 200k and then do 500 miles a year☺️

True, but there are a fair few who will go and do 2000 miles over an October weekend, or 3000 miles in a week around europe. So want an engine that can cope. 

So we should encourage people to seek better parts. The are safer, more reliable and usually better value over the long term. 

[johny]

With the demand now I just dont think its going to happen and we're lucky to get as many bits made as we do. Owners of rare classics must really suffer and have to get stuff custom made!

[Roger K]

If we don't ask for and buy parts, they will cease to be available.  I think many classics considered 'budget' are closer to the cliff edge than you might think.

 

[johny]

Yes and it follows that the companies most likely to oblige us tend to be in China and India etc so the quality is likely to be lower than the original components....

[Dick Twitchen]

53 minutes ago, clive said:

So we should encourage people to seek better parts. The are safer, more reliable and usually better value over the long term.

Wholly supported, just a pity the Forum regularly has comments about finding it 'cheaper' (eg than the Club shop) and the same culprit, sorry member, then moaning shortly thereafter about parts that were not quite fit for purpose.  Grump over.

Dick

[johny]

The trouble is price doesnt always equate to quality (despite what the supplier might tell you) and, as discussed previously, quite often all the suppliers are getting the items from the same manufacturer anyway...

[Clive]

5 minutes ago, johny said:

Yes and it follows that the companies most likely to oblige us tend to be in China and India etc so the quality is likely to be lower than the original components....

No, China can make fantastic quality stuff. It is just that the trade "know" what Triumph owners are like, so tend to spec a lower priced specification.  

But people like Dave Pearson also get a great deal of stuff made here in the UK, however he mentioned the skill base is disappearing so we  probably need to stock up on quality stuff when we can. 

I am taking the approach that we have 15 years max left of using our cars (maybe more pottering to local car show, but that isn't my thing except for one or 2 a year) As such I am planning on keeping my cars going for that length of time. At which point they are likely to have little monetary value, and will have seen a great deal of action/use. I will then hang the keys up.....

This morning I have been contemplating what everyday car I should buy. I am even thinking about an all-electric. 95% of my journeys are under 100 miles round trip.  Most days I do maybe 20-30 miles. So why not use one of my Triumphs for longer journeys when needed (having bought a dolomite this is actually viable)

[Colin Lindsay]

1 hour ago, clive said:

I am taking the approach that we have 15 years max left of using our cars

And then, what? I've been hearing this since the oil crisis in the 1970s... we're all doomed. Horses and carts were doomed to extinction.... steam engines were doomed... gas guzzlers are soon to be extinct... now our own cars are all going to be forced off the roads or else pay massive punitive fines or taxes. Be sensible. There will always be a niche for old cars as part of motoring and indeed the country's history.

I might have twenty years of driving life left, if I survive that long and don't get run over by an electric thingie or some lycra clad cyclist feeling the burn down the footpath. I don't see my cars going to either the scrappie or a museum; future generations will still take them on, maybe with a few more regulations and difficulties in parts or fuel, but they won't vanish. 

 

[Clive]

20 minutes ago, Colin Lindsay said:

And then, what? I've been hearing this since the oil crisis in the 1970s... we're all doomed. Horses and carts were doomed to extinction.... steam engines were doomed... gas guzzlers are soon to be extinct... now our own cars are all going to be forced off the roads or else pay massive punitive fines or taxes. Be sensible. There will always be a niche for old cars as part of motoring and indeed the country's history.

I might have twenty years of driving life left, if I survive that long and don't get run over by an electric thingie or some lycra clad cyclist feeling the burn down the footpath. I don't see my cars going to either the scrappie or a museum; future generations will still take them on, maybe with a few more regulations and difficulties in parts or fuel, but they won't vanish. 

 

I just think that as electric cars take over petrol will get harder and harder to find, or afford. Yes, it may be viable to do low mileages, but that is not why I own my Triumphs. I like the long european trips, and Scotland🙂

Maybe 15 years is being a bit pessimistic,  but I think there are changes happening that will only speed up. The manufacturers seem to have made a commitment to electric, unless somebody knows better. 

The thing is, I don't see it as petrol/diesel car owners all changing to buy electric. I think that is unrealistic, and so we may see the rise of the driverless car ONCE they manage to get them to work properly. And that will be the beginning of the end of private car ownership. This pandemic will have a lasting effect on transport with more people working from home. 

Anyway, I have every intention of using plenty of petrol as long as it is viable. And do as many miles as possible. 

The sums sort of add up for an electric car. I do about 12-14K in the modern diesel each year (under half that this one) but it may reduce a bit, say to 10K as we no longer have daughters come on holiday with us. (so can use the spitfire etc) That will cost me about £1400. Electric about £400, but fuel costs on old cars go up a little. (that would be offset by the extraordinary cost of a parking permit, £700 for a diesel, half that for electric or very low emission petrol)

Still uncertain I can live with an electric with say 150mile range. But I am in no rush. 

Otherwise it will be a diesel Honda.....(probably)