|
Post by tommydp on May 9, 2011 7:05:53 GMT
LOL:-) My mistake! 0,95 litres in 10 kilometers of course:-) About 29 miles pr gallon, I think:-)
|
|
|
Post by tommydp on May 8, 2011 16:29:56 GMT
Regarding my last reply, I must admit I'm not sure how front door pockets are arranged in the Wolseley crabs. I've never had or broken one of those. Perhaps you don't need this panel I'm talking about after all:-)
Anyway, mk 2 models need them, as they have shorter door pockets than the mk 1. Mk 3s were never sold here, so I'm not sure about them either. Perhaps they didn't have door pockets at all, like the Maxi?
Btw, it seems some workers wrote their name in hidden painted parts:-) At least one of my Maxi doors was signed "Alan" in the paint behind the door panel:-) I found that cool in some way, so left it when painting rest of the door Blue Royale:-)
Have a look, perhaps your door is painted by Alan, too:-)
|
|
|
Post by tommydp on May 8, 2011 15:22:28 GMT
I fitted Maxi doors on the left of my mk 2 Morris. There is one more minor difference: There is a welded vertical panel across the big, lower hole in font on mk 2 front doors, not on the Maxi. Just below the window winder. This is to hold the two plastic mounts you fasten the front doorpocket screws two.
I didn't notice this was missing on the Maxi door until finishing the door pockets and panels, so I just cut the panel off the rusty mk2 door, and just screwed it onto the Maxi door:-) If you look closely at the previous pictures of the Wolseley Six doors, your left door has this panel, not your right:-) So there's a different right front door. I'm not surprised if this was done at the factory, they used what they had at hand I guess. If they ran out of 1800/ 6 etc doors they grabbed one meant for a Maxi I guess:-)
Believe me, I have a Marina with autumn leaf brown seats and doorpanels etc. Carpet and window seals etc are navy blue though:-) Yes, it's original:-)
Regards, Tommy
|
|
|
Post by tommydp on May 7, 2011 18:08:13 GMT
Well, I changed the rubber coupling and mounted it very accurately, tightening the nuts evenly with the driveshaft horizontal, put a block of wood between lower bump rubber and upper suspension arm. I also loosened the other coupling and tightened it again the same way.
Prior to this I mounted the shock absorber again, as it seemed my tie rod arrangement instead of this made the lump tilt somewhat backwards. I then changed the lower tierod bush.
At least the couplings don't squeek when turning the wheels now, as they used to do and the whole coupling seems more straight when driveshaft is horizontal. I guess they were out of alignment some way. The driveshafts seem slightly out of balance still though, but I'm not sure if this matters.. Wer'e talking millimeters.
On the road, luckily, the annoying vibration at certain speeds has gone away. There is some wobble at very low speed, but I guess this is due to the tyres and/ or wheels. Steering wheel is very fine, no shake at any speed. Tyres are fairly new, but cheap and bad I guess. They are very hard to get here. Bought them last year, though new they are made in 2005, Chinese or something and rock hard...
I'll check the wheels for balance and eventually fit proper, new 175/ 70 14, which are easier to get here. Actually I find my steel studded 175/ 70 14s far more comfortable! They are a proper brand, too. Turning the present, cheap tyre wheels, they have slight movement in/ out, that is if I watch a thread of the tyre it doesn't go in a straight line in one full rotation of the wheel.. We're not talking much here either, but I like it perfect... Does it matter? All wheel bearings are new by the way.
Well, after all I'm getting closer to my goal: a perfect crab! The engine btw is perfect. Fuel consumption is about 0,95 litres pr kilometer with a lot of short journeys and city driving. I'm very pleased with that.
Regards, Tommy
|
|
|
Post by tommydp on May 7, 2011 8:12:14 GMT
I used to have a Princess gearbox, but went back to the original one when I put in the new engine. I wrote the thread about pressure on the driveshafts etc when it came to the Princess gearbox:-) I'm using the same coupling though, perhaps it was damaged in some way.
Engine mounts appear fine, not sagging etc. They are quality Unipart/ BL items. There is a bad bush on the lower tie rod, however, I'll try to fix that. I can't see that this wil make a visible wobble at the drive shaft when I jack up the car and turn the wheel though, but perhaps I'm wrong..
Also, I've replaced the engine shock absorber with a tie rod. Perhaps that's not a good idea? I've done it on previous 1800s though, as I got tired of the big flat mountings breaking down in no time.
Guess I'll try another coupling first and fix the lower tie rod. Then perhaps go back to the shock absorber and adjust the lower tie rod.
Thanks, Tommy:-)
|
|
|
Post by tommydp on May 5, 2011 22:55:25 GMT
Hi! Well, finally got the engine sorted I'm working on a driveshaft wobble issue. There is some regular up and down movement of the driveshaft when rotating the wheel. I've changed the CV joint, driveshaft and hub bearings. There was quite a lot of slack in the CV joint, and one of the bearings was bad.
However, the wobble/ up and down movement of the shaft is still there. I guess it will have to be the rubber coupling then? Can anyone please shed some light on correct assembly of this?
Does the shaft have to be in a straight line, and can you tolerate any visible wobble? Earlier I've just tightened the nuts on each U evenly and been fine. Perhaps I've got a bad coupling, might be due to my trouble with the Princess gearbox..
I'll try another coupling tomorrow.
Regards, Tommy:-)
|
|
|
Post by tommydp on Apr 24, 2011 22:35:18 GMT
Well, I'm happy to announce that the "Norwegian saga of the hot camshaft 10 degrees out" has come to its end:-)
I removed a standard cam from one of my spare blocks, and it was virtually as new. No pitting, nice "nose" on all lobes and though somewhat roughly measured, the lobes were all identical.
So, the 285 cam came out, with engine in car. No problem at all, cut off lower part of number three fin at bottom of the inner wing airflow grille, and bent it out of the way. You don't even have to remove the wheel. Just turn it all the way left!
Concerned about the headgasket, I managed to remove pushrods and cam followers without loosening rocker shaft/ cylinder head nuts. Screwed the rocker/ valve adjusters all the way up and was able to remove pushrods when valves were closed. Had to push some valves down to be able to get pushrods away from the rocker though.
Well, got it all together, oiled cam and followers well and turned the key. Didn't touch the carb and I now installed the original 41234 25D distributor, 10 degrees BTDC static. Ah, what a relief! The smoothest idle I've ever heard and engine rock steady. As expected, idle was high, so I could turn the throttle down quite a lot. Suction at advance pipe then disappeared:-) Vacuum gauge read 21 at idle. What a moment of joy:-) At the exhaust the correct, regular beat and a mild regular blow compared to the hot cam's "push".
Then out for a spin:-) It was fabulous from the start. I've driven it quite a lot now, and it's still brilliant and idle is rock steady. You can barely hear the engine and it pulls like a train going up any hill in fourth gear without effort. I'm extremely satisfied, and enjoy its performance. No doubt, torque is far better than what I got with the 285 cam adn I find it more than quick enough. I believe a correct dizzy is the issue here.
All in all, what an experience this has been. I've learned a lot for sure and hope others can benefit from my experiences. I'm extremely thankful for all the help and sympathy I've got from you all. I wouldn't have made it without you.
I'm going to see the company after Easter, as I'm not satisfied with their work when it comes to the cam. I might tell them where to put that cam... After all, they've installed a cam they didn't know the specs for, they didn't time it and never found out something was wrong with the sprocket marks. Also, they didn't fit a gasket between the oil pump and block... Luckily I checked. Well, I've got a plan. I've decided to restore the spares car as well, and another reconditioned block would be nice:-) I'll fit the cam myself though:-)
I'll keep you informed. Again, thanks all:-) What a great forum we have!
Regards, Tommy:-)
|
|
|
Post by tommydp on Apr 24, 2011 21:43:37 GMT
Hi, and welcome:-) Your Wolseley looks great! I'm sure the clutch will be fine with a new slave cylinder. Good luck! When it comes to tyres, 175/70 14 also work fine. It's very hard to get 165/80 14 in Norway, so I got 175/70 14 studded ones for winter use and they've been fine.
Tommy:-)
|
|
|
Post by tommydp on Apr 15, 2011 23:02:51 GMT
Well, I've driven it for a while now and decided I'll change the cam for a softer one, better suited the car's originality and what I use it for. The cam doesn't suit the rest of the car, in my opinion. In addition, I believe it will take some time and money to make it function well when it comes to ignition. Electronic ignition, 123 distributor etc. I managed to fix the running on, however it will then pink at load.. It's hard to make it run evenly when slowing down the throttle enough to make the suck in advance tube go away.. Reading about the use of 285 cam on the net, it's combined with work done to the head, exhaust, electronic dizzy etc. So, out it goes. I'm sure I'll get it out with engine in car, removing two of the fins in the radiator air flow grille on the inner wing. I can't believe it will weaken the chassis strenght of the crab, removing these bits:-) The question then, what to get. I have always been pleased with the performance of the standard 1800, and after all this engine has been totally rebuilt. If not that quick, I've especially enjoyed it's ability to climb all our hills without any effort and it's torque at low speed. And I love its steady low idle:-) So, what to get? A standard 1800 cam or a standard MGB? I suppose the MGB, same as 1800 S, will make performance better, and still provide torque and a smooth idle. I had a Marina TC once, which ran beautifully in every way. Towed a caravan across Norway too without hesitating, something I hope to do with the 1800 as well once sorted:-) It will also be easier to adjust engine with this cam, I suppose. The MGB is easier to get at least. Only way to get a standard 1800 cam seems to be Earlpart (reprofiled). There are some bad MGB cams around. The Norwegian supplier confirms his stock is from the far East, but he had never had complaints about them:-) Well, I think I'll go for this: cgi.ebay.co.uk/88G303-MGB-CAMSHAFT-5-BEARING-NEW-MG-MGB-MGBGT-/260757999316?pt=UK_CarsParts_Vehicles_CarParts_SM&hash=item3cb6634ed4I don't care about the petrol pump drive. I'll either put in an electric pump or have the company put the drive on from an old cam, like they did on the present 285. So, any opinions on this are more than welcome! I think I'll go for the standard MGB, but great to hear what others may suggest. Regards, Tommy:-)
|
|
|
Post by tommydp on Apr 13, 2011 23:25:23 GMT
Dave's brilliant link to animated vacuum gauge explains my vacuum reading, it seems:-) Scenario 3. Some needle shake at around 15 at idle for tuned engines, cam with high lift/ valve overlap etc. Great:-)
|
|
|
Post by tommydp on Apr 13, 2011 22:19:45 GMT
Great to hear that others have enjoyed this thread too:-)
Well, I got the cam timing right, turned cam one tooth on the chain and the timing could be confirmed as 35-69-69-35. I set the ignition static to 10 degrees btdc.
It ran smoother from the moment I turned the key, a steady idle, the engine is rock steady at idle and when revving. You can certainly hear from the exhaust, this is a tuned engine, however it doesn't spit. It's obvious that the engine runs smoothly, but the exhaust sounds a bit lumpy, and that's the way it will have to be with this cam, I understand. There's quite a "push" from the exhaust pipe, as expected. However the sound is quite pleasant, especially when going down after revving..
I don't have a tacho at the moment, but I do believe it's below 1000 rpm, at steady idle. There's still vacuum at the distributor pipe then. If i screw the throttle down, it will go away, but it will start hunting and spit occasionally.
Vaccum gauge still give a low reading though.. About 13 at idle. Perhaps the valves are a bit loose. I adjusted to 0.015 cold, and I have never found out what a "sliding fit" is.. I guess I adjust them a bit too lose. Also, perhaps ignition is a bit retarded. I didn't have the time to check with a strobe.
Took it for a ride, and it pulls really well, especially from about 40 mph in fourth gear (no tachometer!) It seems to perform well in all conditions, Pulls very well up hill, it's also pleasant to drive slowly, in second and third gear. There's no pinking or other unusual sounds and the engine is extremely quiet. It does run on a bit when stopping, so perhaps I'll try to advance ignition a bit. I'm running a cheap repro MGB 45d type off ebay now, but it seems to work fairly well though:-) Using original Lucas coil without ballast, and it doesn't get hot, except slightly at idle.
What plug gap would you recommend for my specs, by the way?
Well, all in all I'm satisfied so far. I guess I'll use it for a while, try minor adjustments and see how it works, and if it remains to my satisfaction. I'm also a bit concerned about how the engine will cope with this cam, after all I'm only using the car for normal driving. Will it be too tough for the engine over time?
At least temperature seems fine, in normal area, if you could trust the gauge. I guess a sport air filter of some kind would come useful, too. It has the original one at present.
Well, we'll se how things turn out:-)
By the way, I hope you had a safe and nice yourney, David:-)
Regards, Tommy:-)
|
|
|
Post by tommydp on Apr 13, 2011 13:46:26 GMT
Hi, and welcome to the board!
I love the 3- litre, and would love to have one! Unfortunately, it was never sold in Norway:-(
Regards, Tommy:-)
|
|
|
Post by tommydp on Apr 12, 2011 19:46:07 GMT
YES! An interesting evening with the crab and various 1800 engines:-) This problem is approaching into science.. Like David said, it's amazing for a teacher to see how much you can learn about things, things you thought you knew a lot about:-) Needless to say, I wouldn't have made this without this forum! A big thank you to all so far, and especially to Dave! You are my new hero:-)
Well... I made a rock steady timing disc by gluing the paper disc to a Princess 1800 crank pulley (bigger) and mounted the Princess timing cover with above timing marks, using top dead centre mark as reference for the dial. Can't do it more accurately in the 150 year old barn I call a workshop:-)
Checked the valve timing over and over again, and I am quite certain: The cam is a 285 AND it's 10 degrees out!
Just look at my readings:
Inlet opens at 25, closes at 80, 25+80+180= 285!
Exhaust opens at 60, closes at 45, 60+45+180= 285!
Add 10 degrees to the openings! Makes 35 for inlet and 70 for exhaust. Openings for a 285 should be 35 and 69 (close to 70!)
Take away 10 degrees from the closing measures! Makes 70 for inlet and 35 for exhaust, which is closing specs for 285 cam. I believe my 80 reading is actually 79 then..
So, the cam is one tooth out on the chain then, perhaps after all? I'll check tomorrow, to see if the readings match the 285 cam correctly. Perhaps it won't run that bad after all. At least I have to check it out, before considering another cam.
When it comes to the cam, I had an interesting experience too. I wanted to try a cam removal, before attempting doing it with engine in car. I've never done it before. Again, I hope this information comes handy to others, even though I guess many are bored by this thread by now:-)
I knew that it's not possible to remove the cam from a mk 1 engine without taking the oil pump out, that is you have to remove engine from gearbox. Well, I had a go on a mk 2 engine. Damn shaft wouldn't come out! Frustrated, I had a smoke and another black coffee (Norwegians drink coffee all day!) While doing that, I had a look in my Autobooks manual, which stated that removal of cam without removing oil pump is not possible on mk1s and: EARLY MK 2s! Of course, this was a 1968 engine!
Had a go on a later engine, and I was able to remove it gently in seconds! So remember this:-)
Regards, your Norwegian friend:-)
|
|
|
Post by tommydp on Apr 12, 2011 14:36:19 GMT
|
|
|
Post by tommydp on Apr 12, 2011 11:27:31 GMT
Old cam was worn, according to them. I see quite bad pitting on "tip" of lobes on it. That's why they got a new cam.
I have at least four 1800 spare blocks though.. One of the cams might still be useful. At present I'm tempted to removing the cam and installing one used from one of my spare engines. Alternatively, get a new, proper standard MGB cam and install that.
|
|