Jump to content

Herald / Vitesse bulkhead to chassis gaps


Colin Lindsay
 Share

Recommended Posts

I've trial fitted the refurbished Herald bulkhead to the refurbished Herald chassis and things are not lining up as I'd like, so I need a few second / third etc opinions.

If I mount the bulkhead using the two front bolts on the chassis front outriggers, the side mountings are too far forward so the mounting bolt will not go up through. If I slide the bulkhead back until the side mountings will take the bolts, the front holes are out by 1/2 inch. Now: I know there's a lot of movement allowed between all the components and I can elongate some of the mounting holes (I suspect the side mounts are wrong), or even fabricate some new mounting brackets to give a good grip in the shorter width that movement will permit, but the main issue is: when do I decide the gaps are correct? I suspect some 'fettling' is required but I need to know how much.

If anyone can have a look at the photos of my white Estate and the primer Convertible and give an opinion on the correct position? The white Estate seems very far forward so that there is no gap at all between the bulkhead and the chassis outrigger; on the convertible, when I line up the side mountings, there's a huge gap, (photos show it pushed back to suit the side mounts) but if I push it forward to use the front holes as the datum point it closes but not as much as the Estate. What does everyone else's look like? No shows to go to to compare, no club meets, no reference photos online... so any photos or comments welcome.

0106B38F-A368-465C-9140-8F4C5CA4EA05_1_105_c.jpg.01fcd67ca8cc783c126e50b5d5f7004c.jpg  70038089-AF70-49ED-9BE6-CA45DE18F907_1_105_c.jpg.aa825218c1e6728f3e239ef3becaba23.jpg

2A414649-2AC0-49FE-91D4-364779C52F3D_1_105_c.jpg.f20299db90595596da4b8e7f954970ac.jpg

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

993138211_TriumphNOSFrontOutrigger.JPG.a042d090f2effed10cd8554bf8ef0bb3.JPG1501664100_TriumphFrontOutriggerrearshotcurvedstregtheningweb.JPG.05e67df9d2abb3823120f0b992e3726f.JPGThe front mounting I always understood to be the datum, ie no movement fixed position and a solid washer between body and outrigger, no rubber?

Are the outriggers on both cars the same dimensions the white one looks wider at the chassis mount, looking on ebay there are many versions of the front outrigger available, constant taper or slope on the bottom flange to the more correct as original double angled taper/slope also some look narrower in their width.

I have two original NOS Triumph ones in the garage with the double slope, was going to fit to the Vitesse but it was only the bottom flang that was rusty so it was cut out and replaced the main chassis rail was still solid.

You've checked the black outrigger is positioned correctly via the official chassis alignments, easy enough to triangulate the front mounting bolt.

I recently had to unbolt the rear tub on the Vitesse to close the rear door gap just 3mm, what a bugger of a job that was now I have to reset the door longitudinal alignment and locks and antiburst fittings Uugh!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I may not be correct?, that I apreciate. But the way I see it, the "datum" are the 2 Bolts in the Engine bay. (front Tub) And the bolts on the top of the Rear axle mount. (Rear Tub)? Everything else falls from that.?. Which is how my 13/60 went back together. As they where the two "positives" and most likely (least) undisturbed by distortion due to panel replacement and welding. It does however Assume that outriggers if replaced where accurately aligned.

Pete

Link to comment
Share on other sites

when we first removed the bulkhead on the Vit6  the sized holes had been opened up to allow more adjustment something like now 3/4" and big washer 

agree they should be the fixed  datum but it all went back as was , and was never a problem 

after all these years what the heck with a re built floor and straight chassis  the packers elsewhere were  what ever was needed  with some very large gaps to pack 

with all the variations in kits and parts books ally spacers at front 2 and the two over the diff x member all others solid spacers and one rubber pad 

and earth bonded everything to everything back to the battery , so no more rusty body earths 

also made some simple wooden door gap gauges that slot over the seal flange so tubs cant converge when messing about 

and once all fits were ok'd  added a sized hole/bolt thro the tread plate so the tubs would  never close up ever again 

Pete

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Peter Truman said:

The front mounting I always understood to be the datum, ie no movement fixed position and a solid washer between body and outrigger, no rubber?

Are the outriggers on both cars the same dimensions the white one looks wider at the chassis mount, looking on ebay there are many versions of the front outrigger available, constant taper or slope on the bottom flange to the more correct as original double angled taper/slope also some look narrower in their width.

The estate was originally built with a solid mount at the front; this was later believed to be incorrect and the only solid mount is on top of the diff supports. Putting a solid mounting at the front actually pulled the bulkhead inwards as the rubber mounts on the side mounts compressed leaving a backward slope on the bulkhead, and the roof wouldn't fit. 

I've measured from suspension mounts to outrigger and it's the same on both cars; but there are different versions of outrigger available so it's no longer 100% set in stone. With a restored chassis and an original bulkhead, no problem working out which needs altered, or vice versa, but with both restored, and separately, I need to work out which to tweak. I've got new front outriggers salted away but only as a last resort. The main worry is that I fit the bulkhead, gap the doors, fit the rear tub and only then find that the bonnet fouls the front grille, or something simple like that that will ruin the entire thing. I know I've got room to manoeuvre with any of the sections - up to a point - but want to arrive at the best possible, so that other owners won't look at the car in years to come and ask: what's wrong with your bonnet / gaps / bulkhead? Someone always does... :)

I reckon this afternoon is going to be another round of measuring and calculating...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Been out this morning measuring what I can and comparing with known data. When I move the bulkhead to the two front mounts only, it looks closer to what I would call normal:

55E9BFA8-EE87-44BE-ACA8-2E23BEDCCC9F_1_105_c.jpg.a2bd9dcbb53426d0d931f24e3f4c134b.jpg  980453C1-2048-461D-8DA5-DCAFDC1F4673_1_105_c.jpg.dd606d4382847e005899d22d752d9b47.jpg

This however puts the side mounts out by slightly over 1/2 an inch. Everything else about the bulkhead seems to align up with the one already fitted on the Estate. I would guess then that either the repair sections at the base of both A posts are wrong, or the side rails have been welded incorrectly; however as the side rail aligns with the end of the front outrigger I'd yet again guess that the body mount repair sections on the bulkhead are wrong. It should be simple enough to cut the mounts off, or replace with new if necessary, and reweld 1/2 inch back. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, Pete Lewis said:

and earth bonded everything to everything back to the battery , so no more rusty body earths 

Yes Pete, I`ve wondered about that. Did you use seperate Bonds. Or just run a Cable to the Rear from the Battery? (negative).

Pete

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks Peter T; it looks like the front outriggers are correct but possibly as Pete L says the side rails might not be. I might be able to fit another crush tube along the side to avoid messing with the mountings, once I get the rear tub on and see how the rears (and indeed all of the other body panels) line up. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Pete Lewis said:

its so you can undo the cill screws without opening the doors 

but is  1/2"  it really a problem  or just cosmetic nicety

Pete

The doors line up nicely with rear tub. but they (it) is (near) 1/2 inch almost proud of the cill, when the cill is postioned correctly behind the tub. IF I put it in front it`s much better. If I adjust the Door to sit closer to the cill. the line with the rear  tub is out!. The door itself, has only had a lower section replaced, not fully re-skinned.

I am asuming that the issue could be to do with the amount of steel that had to be replaced in both tubs.  Despite being extremely careful with measuring some distortion is I suppose inevitable.

Pete

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, PeteH said:

Now all I need is someone to tell my why I have an 1/2" gap between the Cills and the doors.😟. With all the other shut lines looking "reasonable".

Pete.

You could always add steel to the bottom of the door, I cut and welded a hinge to get an acceptable, to me, line then had to thin the hinge bolt heads for clearance.

There is always a knock on to altering something but a big hammer and a welder helps.

Regards

Paul

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...