Date: 07 Feb 94 19:18:00 -0500
From:Guy Fortier
Well it finally got warm enough around here in south eastern Ontario (-5C) to be able to go out the garage and start the long over due winter maintenance to theCommando. So I bundled myself up, poured a nice shot of JD and made my way out to the garage. When I got there I found the Commando covered in frost, or at least the parts I wanted to work on were covered in frost, so after wiping down the affected areas I began taking off the cylinder head so I could have the exhaust ports rethreaded.
Everything came apart easily due to having coated all the studs with copa-slip during the last re-build. It only took about an hour to remove the head (including removing gas tank,coils and carb), I think I'm getting pretty good at it, seeing this my third time removing the head. Both previous attempts were caused by head gasket failures (composite material variety's), I now use the big thick copper gaskets. Although they may leak every once and a while, they won't blow out like the composite ones. Well now that got this much done it's time to call the machine shop and arrange to have the work done.
Date: Mon, 28 Feb 94 14:50:36 EST
From: John Pinkham.
After installing a Boyer ignition, I was about to time my 850 Norton when I noticed a rapidly enlarging puddle of motor oil coming from the front of the engine after a few minutes of running. It appears to be coming from the head gasket area. Anybody else ever experience this phenomenon? If I had followed the Clymer manual, I would have retorqued the head bolts before I adjusted the valves, etc. Unfortunately this job appears to require a Whitworth socket which I didn't have. Also heard that the Commando front head studs tend to strip out. HeliCoils ?
2.2 Port and Polish the Cylinder Head.
Date: Wed, 2 Mar 94 06:07:04 PST
From: dwhite@atl.com (David White)
I have a pre-unit Triumph Tiger engine with a Bonneville head. I want to get it ported.
Appreciate input on;
In response to Dave White's "dwhite@atl.com" inquiry on porting his Triumph:
Dave, let me put my two cents in. I am speaking as an non-professional with 35 years experience tinkering with motors, reading a lot, and paying attention at the rally tech sessions. Porting should be left to the pros. Limit youself to matching all the ports (carb to mainfold, manifold to head, and exhaust port to exhaust pipe).
You can probably get away with smoothing any rough castings in the head and manifold but it is important not to change the shape of the intake port. The finish on the intake side should be no finer than 400-600 sandpaper would produce. The exhaust will benefit from polishing. A polished surface if applied to the intake would actually increase surface tension, attract fuel droplets, and slow the flow at the surface.
Same princple is applied to golf balls. A smooth ball would provide more drag (I believe it has something to do with Hemholtz Effect) My experience is with Nortons so I can't help you with valve choices. Most experts now adays think the cast iron valve seats are fine with current fuels.Your valve guides will probably need to be replaced before the seat goes.Cams and porting should be thought of as a package job.
Changing one item (carbs, cam, port shape, exhaust shape and length) requires changing all of the components if maximum benefit is to be gained. Otherwise a gain in one area will usually cost you somewhere else. I believe Big-D cycles in Dallas, TX are still among the premiere Triumph tuners in the US. Also Leo Goff in Memphis,TN is excellent. You should try to get a hold of his articles in the TIOC-BIMA newsletter in particular the one on valve seats which was done within the last six months. (sorry I am not a member and don't know which one for sure) As far as all of this stuff working Leo is now getting over 100 rear wheel horsepower from an ~900cc, pushrod, normally aspirated Norton motor on gasoline. I would invite and welcome any more opinions/input on these topics.
Date: Wed, 2 Mar 94 13:45:11 CST
From: Bruce Graham
David White asks:
>I have a pre-unit Triumph Tiger engine with a
Bonneville head. I want to get it
>ported. Are you using a latemodel 9 bolt head?
>Appreciate input on; Wether polishing realy
does much.
You really need to find someone with a flow-bench and a lot of knowledge about carbs, exhaust, cams, compression, etc to help on porting/polishing issues. I think that just matching inlet ports is the easiest way to improve performance.
>Valve choices.
I believe you can get larger valves installed on the later model heads. The valve seats will have to be recut for the new valves. Standard valves seem to work fine for non-race applications.
>Unleaded conversion.
An unleaded conversion would make sense if you plan to do a *lot* of riding, or if your current valve seats are already recessed/over-cut so that you are having valve shrouding problems. If your valve seats are in good condition I would leave them alone and monitor the wear (watch valve clearances).
>I have stock cams, if the head work is done for
the stock lift what choices do I have
>for a hotter cam in the future?
You have a lot of choices for cams. It all depends on what you plan to do with the bike. The cam I am using is a megacycle (1060 I think) which is a mild grind for street use. If you go with a non-stock cam, and a hi-comp pistons, you may need to remachine the valve cutouts in the pistons.
>Who does a good job on this stuff?
Big D Cycle (in Dallas Tx) can do all the work, make all the recommedations, and provide all the parts. Their work is execellent. Just tell them what you are trying to build (stock, street, race, etc). Jack Wilson (owner) has been racing Triumphs for many, many years.
Be prepared to spend some bux. BIG D CYCLE 3600 W.DAVIS DALLAS,TX (214)339-2285 REPAIR/PARTS/RESTORATION Good luck, let us know how it works out.
Date: Wed, 2 Mar 94 15:46:17 PST
From: Graeme Harrison
>>I have a pre-unit Triumph Tiger engine with
a Bonneville head. I want to
>>get it ported.
> Are you using a late model 9 bolt head? The
pre-unit 650cc twin with a late model 9-bolt Bonneville head gets my vote
as the most beautiful Triumph engine. There's a excellent shop down in
Southern CA called Branch Flowmetrics which would be just the ticket for
porting/polishing that head. Depends on whether Dallas, TX or CA is closer
as well as price, too. Don't have address for Branch, but will dig it up
if interested. A good number of Britbike shops will act as a middleman
for porting/polishing work so ask and see which vendor they use as well
as how much they'd want for handling it.
A vendor may give the dealer a discount which would be the dealer's cut meaning customer may not have to pay extra for going thru dealer. YMMV.
From: MikeTnyc@aol.com
Date: Sat, 21 Oct 1995 12:59:11 -0400
Subject: Re: My Friday the 13th (long)
Lord, what a hellish mess! (I thought I had problems when I discovered Raul needed a ring job). Would I be correct in guessing that your fragged main bearing wasn't a Superblend (#NJ306E -- the pre-Superblend bearing doesn't have the "E"). These weren't stock until late '72, so your bike didn't have them originally, and a pre-Combat engine might have lasted 'till now without them.
If you find the bearings aren't Superblends, replace them both, (however good the other one looks), and don't let anyone talk you into anything other than the genuine FAG bearing, #NJ306E.
If you find that the failed bearing WAS a Superblend, I'm not sure I want to know about it. They're supposed to last 100,000 miles, and I still have 90 K to go.
Mike Taglieri
Raul -- '72 Commando Interstate (whose original bearings were so pockmarked when they came out that they looked like the surface of the moon. . .)
2.4 Cleaning up Piston Meltdown.
Date: Fri, 18 Mar 1994 10:26:44 -0800 (PST)
From: Tim Keane
I'm finally getting around to rebuilding the engine on my '67 TR6R. A couple years ago this engine had the most drastic failure I've personally encountered, and I was so bummed I just set it aside (besides, I had just acquired the JPN and was more interested in it).
The engine failed when the left piston melted, leaving a long aluminum spooge streak down the cylinder wall (you'd have to see it to appreciate it). So I took the barrel down to the local Triumph shop to check on getting it bored another 010, and Steve (the service guy there) said that I should first clean off the aluminum spooge with some kind of acid -- he can't remember what kind. So... any ideas on what kind of acid would clean the aluminum off without harming the cylinder wall or me (and where I can acquire it)?
Date: Fri, 18 Mar 1994 10:44:39 -0800
From: Alastair Young
Tim Keane said:
>I'm finally getting around to rebuilding the engine on my '67 TR6R. Etc.....
Try caustic soda. This is used to clean rust off cast iron and I remember being warned not to let it near ally because it eats it. Don't know how "caustic soda" translates into Amerispeak though.
Date: Fri, 18 Mar 1994 15:04:59 -0500 (EST)
Alastair Young said:
Caustic soda (aka Sodium Hydroxide) will work
to remove aluminum. I almost disolved my Norton head in it trying to remove
some carbon.
Date: Fri, 18 Mar 94 17:18:27 -0500 (EST)
Caustic Soda, AKA lye, AKA drano! It eats aluminium
and leaves steel, I remember this from the time I tried to etch PC boards
in a disposable roasting pan.
Date: Fri, 18 Mar 1994 21:25:42 -0800 (PST)
On Fri, 18 Mar 1994, Latte' Jed wrote:
I knew a guy had a Matchless single that had been
raced a lot, and had Castrol R burnt to the Cylinder head real bad. He
left it soaking in caustic soda overnight, and the next day (or two) all
he found was the bronze combustion chamber liner. The Al was gone. This
can be hard on your attitude.
From: "D.J. Walker" <djw12@leicester.ac.uk>
Dear All, In response to this problem of identifying
the Combat's 2S cams, I rang Les Emery about this just now, and he says
the old 2S cam*should* bear the stamp "S S" on the left hand end lobe area.
This is a little confusing, since I wrote earlier saying that a 2S cam
should never be described as an "SS", since an SS is the 650SS Dominator
cam.... etc. But there's the manufacturer, gone and stamped "S S" on the
damn things!
The cams from bikes in the low 200,000's (engine
numbers) had plain ends and scrolled bearing bushes, as opposed to scrolled
end and plain bearings, which is the normal setup. He agreed that the latter
system is the better of the two, because it simply provides better lubrication.
The 2S cams his company now manufactures all have this arrangement (as
do all his other camshafts, of course).
His opinion of the 2S camshaft is rather low,
and he reckons it's the least useful of the lot, as far as usable performance
goes, whilst tending to put greater strain on the valve mechanism. The
inlet cams of the S, 2S, 4S and 7S have each got successively greater lift
than each other, running in that order. Someone has already said that the
S has .332 lift, the 2S has .380, and as a matter of interest, the 7S,
high performance cam has .470 lift. The 2S doesn't give enough power for
its increased problem-potential, apparently. Why not see about a 4S, if
you're thinking of changing it, or going to the gentler S-setup?
I mentioned to him that the Combat in question
still had the old main bearings setup, and he said this showed the bike
must have been run at high revs for much of its life. At a consistent engine
speed of over 4000rpm the old setup is fine, Les told me, but if the bike
is chugged around at 2-3000rpm, the bearing''ll give way. Either way, snapping
of the crankshaft is more likely with the old setup, if you realy thrash
it. I guess everyone knew this anyway, but it's nice to hear it from one
of the experts.
Sorry I couldn't be of any better help, Steve.
Anyway, I'm off for the weekend.
Commando Dan
2.6 Replacing
the Cam Chain Tensioner.
Date: Thu, 4 Jan 1996 13:50:02 -0500 (EST)
to all my knowledge a replacement is not only
possible but also strongly recommended. your bewilderment ( metal on metal
) is very justified!
I've been using the standard tensioner for years.
It's only the edges of the plates that rub on it, and do so when it's not
under tension. I have virtually no chain adjustments for thousands
of miles. Can someone tell me whether it is actually the consensus
that this thing ought to be replaced?
I've been using the standard tensioner too (I
have an early '69 so there isn't much choice since the bonded face type
only seem to be available for the later single timing chain motor).
I rode the bike for 90,000 miles before replacing it with a good used one
because the rollers were getting too close. I have no idea how much
over that 90,000 it had been in the motor. It's quite possable that
it was the origonal and therefore had about 190,000 miles on it.
Obviousley I wouldn't bother.
hi colin,
From: DDODGE <DDODGE@nvn.com>
My '72 still has the steel slipper, but I've been
afraid to get the rubber one because of the very problem mentioned here:
the rubber can fall off and cause a dramatic loss of tension in the chain,
especially since the metal underneath is not hardened. One guy in
Classic Mechanics some years ago brazed a narrow brass track to the steel
shoe so the chain rollers would roll over the shoe rather than the sideplates
sliding on it. There's also a third kind: a company called RMA Engineering
(408/578-4032) advertises in Norton News (magazine of the US Norton Owners
Assoc) an automatic cam-chain adjuster that replaces the slipper with a
spring-loaded molybdenum disulphide-filled nylon shoe and costs about $70.00
-- you never touch it again after you put it in.
I thought all those slipper things worked by having
the chain rollers roll/slide over them, it being expected that the chain
plates would immediately wear grooves in slipper. At least that's the way
I remember the primary in the Vincent worked.
2.7 Adjusting
the Cam Chain Tensioner
Date: Wed, 11 May 94 14:26:44 BST
It's not that I enjoy the frustration of engine
manitanance, I just feel you need to be in the right mood, or to be more
precise, the right frame of mind.
There are times when nothing goes right, there
is always that one bolt or screw that just won't budge, but you persist,
then things really take a turn for the worst. In your heart, you feel you
just need to 'fix this bit', or 'undow that screw' and it will all start
going right, but it never happens, not on that occation anyhow.
There is probably some deep carmic (sp) reason
for this, maybe its the phase of the moon, maybe its your biorhythms, the
tides or what you've been eating. The thing is, the bikes working together
with this force, and what you really should learn to do is give up when
this happens, but of course you don't, and things go from bad to worse.
Setting the Cam Chain Tension on the Commando.
The first thing you start to ask yourself is,
why use a chain, wouldn't it be better to use an intermediate gear like
the Triumph twin Edward Turner designed ?
Anyhow, how I did it the first time:
There's a small gear on the end of the crancshaft,
timing side, which drives a larger gear immediately above called the intermediate
gear This is used to achieve a 50% reduction in speed and change in direction.
The intermediate gear has a sprocket attached which drives a chain which
then drives a sprocket on the end of the Camshaft and thereby the camshaft.
There's a sliper tensioner on the lower, or return run of the chain. This
is to reduce backlash in the camshaft and improve the lifespan of the auto
advance.
In Bacon’s book on restoring Norton Twins he goes
on and on about how you can't set the cam chain tension with the cover
off as there is nothing to support the intermediate gear shaft, the question
is, If you haven't got a scrap timing cover, with holes cut in it for this
purose, (and very few people have) How are you going to set free play ?
The correct free play is, 3/16" slack on the top
run of the chain, check in several positions, when correct torque the adjuster
nuts to 15 Flb.
My cam chain was so slack the top run had started
eating into the top adjuster nut. On closer inspection, I found the rubber
face of the adjuster lose at the bottom of the timing chest, the chain
was also eating into the steel face of the adjuster.
Now the bad news, assuming you have to replace
the slipper tensioner: This won't come off with the chain in place. Yeah
I know the manual kinda looks like it does but I couldn't manage it. It
does move about a bit, in a tantalising sort of way, but it realy wont
come off without removing or displacing the camchain. To remove or displace
the chain (to allow the adjustor to be removed) you have to remove either
the sprocket on the end of the intermediate gear, or, the sprocket on the
end of the camshaft, or both.
Although there is some side to side movement,
the sprocket on the intermediate gear, and the intermediate gear itself,
cannot be slipped off the intermediate shaft as the gear hits the spiral,
or worm drive for the oil pump. If you chose to remove the intermediate
gear remember, the oil pump worm gear has a LEFT HAND THRED.
The sprocket on the end of the camshaft is retained
with a nut and located with a wodruff key. If you decide to remove this
sprocket you will first have to remove the nut. When you do remove the
camshaft sprocket nut, APPLY ONLY CONSTANT PRESSURE. Don't bash the spanner
with a hammer to try and 'shock' the nut free, as this may tear the
intermediate gear shaft out of the crankcase. You will need a good fitting
socket or spanner for this, I have noticed that most sockets have a radiused
opening which doesn't allow the socket to fully engage on the nut, allowing
it to slip off all too easy. Once the nut is removed, the sprocket can
only be removed with a small two leg gear or sprocket puller.
A note of caution, if you decide to pull the camshaft
sprocket first this will pull the chain and intermediate gear out a little
where the intermediate gear will start to interfere with the worm drive
for the oil pump on the end of the crankshaft. If you then attempt to remove
the worm drive, and this is usually a very tight fit, the interferring
gears will start to cross mesh and distroy each other.
Thing is, if you do pull the camshaft sprocket,
you can get the tensioner out without touching the worm or oil pump, just
remember the to stop the worm and the intermediate gears cross meshing
and eating eating each other.
Apparently there are two different types of slipper
tensioner. The earlier one is plain steel, the later one is steel but with
a rubber face. To me the later one is more attractive, I'd rather have
bits of rubber floating around the engine than bits of steel.
While the timing cover is off you may chose to
replace the oil seals located therein. The Oil Seal for the points can
be prised out with a screwdriver, I drifterd in a new one with a socket
of the right size, this goes spring towards the engine. Dont forget to
spread a little gasket goo on the outsie of the seal to prevent oil escaping
round the outside. Later points oil seals are red in colour, and
are considered better quality.
The oil seal for the end of the crankshaft is
retained with a circlip. Once the circlip is removed, you can prise the
oil seal out with a screwdriver. This seal goes in with the spring, or
gater, the other way round, pointing away from the engine. Again, I drifted
mine in with a socket of the right size and a small hammer. The socket
needs to be large enough so it bears down on the outer edge of the seal,
but small enough so it clears the hole in the casting. When the new seal
is in, don't forget the circlip, which should be fitted 'sharp' edge away
from the seal.
It is recommended that the little rubber seal
on the end of the oil pump, is replaced every time the cover is removed
and replaced. This seal is responsible for maintaining oil pressure to
the crankshaft, and thereby the engine, it only costs about 50 pee, (uk)
so why not replace it every time ? There's a lot of talk about this seal
in the manuals, it needs to be a good tight fit. On some engines this was
achieved with shims or washers fitted under the seal, in later engines
a gasket was fitted behind the oil pump. Just lookout for the shims/washers
and put them back if fitted.
When I replaced the camshaft sprocket and nut
I torqued the nut down to 70Flb, there was no figure given in the manual
but this seems reasonable. I never did get the worm gear with its left
hand thred off. I wasn't able to lock the engine well enough by puting
it in gear and applying the back break, I guess this is a job to be tackled
when the engines out and I can replace the camchain at that time too. Removing
the camshaft sprocket gives enough access to remove and replace the slipper
tensioner.
One other thing, before you replace the timing
cover remove any remnants of the old points seal from the shaft, a little
ring of rubber collects there. And dont forget the service tool which protects
the points oil seal when re-fitting the cover.
Once re-assembled, I have found two documented
ways of providing initial lubrication to the engine and priming the oil
pump, (you need to prime the pump if there is no oil in it). The first,
and possibly simplist, is to remove the intake rocker cover, and fill with
oil. It looks like this then drains down the oil return and into the timing
chest, not sure if this primes the pump though. The second involves
priming the crankshaft with oil via the rocket feed banjo and pipe with
about a 'tea cup' (yes, that what it says in the manual), full of oil through
an oil syringe ? I'll let you know how I get on.
HOW I WOULD DO IT AGAIN NOW I HAVE DONE IT ONCE:
From: MikeTnyc@aol.com
Apparently there are two different types of slipper
tensioner. The earlier one is plain steel, the later one is steel but with
a rubber face. To me the later one is more attractive, I'd rather have
bits of rubber floating around the engine that bits of steel.
I believe the purpose of the rubber-covered slipper
was mostly to reduce noise rather than protect the engine from steel particles
-- Norton had trouble with EPA and English noise standards during this
engine's last years. My '72 still has the steel slipper, but
I've been afraid to get the rubber one because of the very problem mentioned
here: the rubber can fall off and cause a dramatic loss of tension in the
chain, especially since the metal underneath is not hardened. One
guy in Classic Mechanics some years ago brazed a narrow brass track to
the steel shoe so the chain rollers would roll over the shoe rather than
the sideplates sliding on it.
There's also a third kind: a company called RMA
Engineering (408/578-4032) advertises in Norton News (magazine of the US
Norton Owners Assoc) an automatic cam-chain adjuster that replaces the
slipper with a spring-loaded molybdenum disulphide-filled nylon shoe and
costs about $70.00 -- you never touch it again after you put it in.
I did a camchain adjustment last about 6,000 miles ago, and I'm grateful
to Peter Aslan for reminding me what a hellish mess it can be. Maybe
that'll get me to finally buy this contraption, so next time can be my
last. USNOA is a great club, by the way -- the magazine alone
is worth the dues. (412/376-4266).
2 other points:
1. If you don't have the service tool to protect
the points-seal, you can get by with a smooth socket, 14mm socket or so.
Push it gently into the points-seal, and it will fall out as the cover
goes on, protecting the seal from the sharp edge of the cam.
2. Once you go to the trouble of getting all this
stuff off to reach the slipper, it's not much more work to remove and rehab
the oil pump to eliminate endplay on the gears. I'm not really sure
why the oil pump would have to be primed if all you were doing was adjusting
the slipper, but after a rebuild you can pre-prime it by filling it with
Vaseline. This moves out quickly when you start, and once it melts
and dissipates, it never solidifies again.
Subject: Tech Tip: Engine Locking
A few weeks ago, Colonel (then Captain) Norton
shared the pleasures of adjusting the cam chain tension on his Norton with
us. He said that he was unable to remove the oil pump drive worm because
he could not lock the engine up enough to turn the securing nut (left hand
Whitworth, of course). Well, Commodore, there is a way. Read it in the
instructions for the automatic cam chain tensioner, I recently invested
$80 US in. Here's how: Remove one sparkplug. Bring that piston to halfway
up. Pour in engine oil until the volume is full. Replace sparkplug. Quickly
remove worm nut, remembering that it's left hand thread. The hydraulic
lock will gradually dissipate by leakage past the rings. Syphon if you
are in a hurry.
Wonder if an air impact wrench might work also
Private Norton
Date: Tue, 7 Jun 94 08:16:00 BST
This mail is really to Private Norton, (John Pinkham).
Who tells us all of the existance of an automatic cam chain tensioner for
the Commando.
Having aroused my curiosity, just how does one
work, are they suitable for the good old Mk2, or just the Mk3 Commando,
and where can I get one from ?
On the Isolastics, there are different Shims for
the Front and rear, remember to adjust them off the center stand, and I
always use something like a crowbar to force the engine to one side to
allow a measurement to be taken.
As the Shims are different sizes, I suspect the
Vernea (Sp) stuff is different front and back also.
When adjusting, the manual says 10 thou, the Blighty
Police always set theirs to 6 thou, and the best advice is, as tight as
possible (<10 thou) ensuring the vibration is bareable, and that there
is some movement in the mounts, otherwise frame damage, (broken welds)
will result. A real improvement in handling can be achieved with the Norvil
Head Steady and mk3 type fixing the swinging arm (fork) spindle with more
nuts and bolts.
Regards Captain Norton.
From: MikeTnyc@aol.com
I've noticed that several writers keep asking
where to buy the automatic cam chain tensioner they've heard about for
the Commando [or maybe it's the same guy over and over?], so I'm repeating
the piece I wrote on this unit around May 15th, for their/his convenience.
Everyone else, please ignore.
There is "a third kind" of camchain tensioner
besides the metal and rubber-covered slippers: "a company called RMA Engineering
(408/578-4032) advertises in Norton News (magazine of the US Norton Owners
Assoc) an automatic cam-chain adjuster that replaces the slipper with a
spring-loaded molybdenum disulphide-filled nylon shoe and costs about $70.00
-- you never touch it again after you put it in. I did a camchain
adjustment last about 6,000 miles ago, and I'm grateful to Peter
Aslan for reminding me what a hellish mess it can be. Maybe that'll
get me to finally buy this contraption, so next time can be my last.
USNOA is a great club, by the way -- the magazine alone is worth the dues.
(412/376-4266)."
Since then, I've looked in more recent issues
of Norton News, and see that the unit is now $79.95 ($5 more/Canada; $10
more / England). Recent ads say, "maintenance free, dampens cam chain
vibration; holds valve and ignition timing precisely; proven performance
in over 12,000 test miles." I figured anyone who wanted this would
call first, but some of you overseas folk may not want to, so the address
is: RMA Engineering / 447 Santa Mesa Drive / San Jose, Ca 95123.
Again I must stress that I have no connection
with these people and do not own this device, although it's gotten good
reviews and I may someday buy one.
{P.S. Thank you all for calming my fears
about Raul's fiberglass tank; it sits very near to organs vital to human
happiness, and I'm glad it's solidly made].
Michael Taglieri
From: John Bria <johnb@hpmva069.nsr.hp.com>
There is "a third kind" of camchain tensioner
besides the metal and rubber-covered slippers: "a company called RMA Engineering
(408/578-4032) advertises in Norton News (magazine of the US Norton Owners
Assoc) an automatic cam-chain adjuster that replaces the slipper with a
spring-loaded molybdenum disulphide-filled nylon shoe and costs about $70.00
-- you never touch it again after you put it in. I did a camchain
adjustment last about 6,000 miles ago, and I'm grateful to Peter
Aslan for reminding me what a hellish mess it can be.
Michael Taglieri
I've had one on my MK2A for about 10K miles (won
it at a NCNOC Christmas party) and have had no problems, no adjustments
... kinda don't know it's there except for the decreased maintenance.
Date: Fri, 10 Jun 94 16:04:58 EDT
Just to add a bit to previous posts by John and
Mike to the subject:
Go for it!
Date: Mon, 16 May 94 18:17:03 BST
Following the cam chain saga, (I must get one
of thoes automatic tensioners), I have to admit that, yes, the oil pump
was removed at some point. And yes I did give the drive shaft a twiddle
out of curiosity to
So, having replaced the timing cover, I filled
the tank with Oil and left it overnight. I thought that the thing would
wet sump and sort of prime everything. Saturday arrives. Out to the garage
and an inspection of the Oil Tank Dip stick and oil feed to the rockers,
(this is via a transparent pipe). No Oil appears to have left the tank,
therefore no more oil is in the engine than the night before, not quite
what I would have expected, and certainly not what I had hoped.
Surely it can't harm the engine if I run it for
a bit and see what heppens. So I started it and looked expectedly at the
oil feed. Nothing. Stop the engine before it gets hot, all sorts of images
start
Right, there's nothing else for it, i'll have
to prime the pump.
Now the manual has this Oil Syringe thing that
looks like a bicycle pump, visions of modifying an old pump or even using
a lenth of tube and forcing the oil down with gravity come to mind.
In the end I unscrewed the lower rocker feed banjo,
the one that screws into the timing cover, pulled off the rocker feed pipe
and connected a short lenth of tube from a brake bleeding kit, (just plain
From the corner of my eye I notice a small oil
gun, the sort with a trigger hand action and a long thin spout. Aha, filled
the gun with fresh oil, stuffed the long thin spout up the other end of
the pipe and pumped till the gun was exausted. This worked remarklably
well, I was able to push loads of oil into the pump with little resistance,
just enough to tell you the pump was there.
It was then a simple matter of removing the banjo,
removing the pipe, cutting about 1/4"" from the end of the oil feed pipe,
(so as to connect with a new and decent bit of pipe), heating it
in boiling water to sofen it up before remating it with the banjo and oil
coupling.
You could immediately see the oil rising in the
rocker feed pipe, and when I started the engine, the oil pushed its way
up the pipe and into the rockers. 50 Miles later all is fine, timing the
engine with a
Regards Peter Aslan aka Captian Norton.
Date: Wed, 18 May 94 17:58:26 EDT
Since motorcycle oil pumps are rotary positive
displacement types, they should be self-priming. Just remove the sparkplugs
and use the kickstarter to motor the engine. Or put the bike up on the
kickstand in 4th gear and rotate the rear tyre. So why bother injecting
oil down rocker feed pipes, filling the pump with Vaseline, etc?
Date: Wed, 18 May 94 17:43 EDT
> Since motorcycle oil pumps are rotary positive
displacement types, they
I remove the spark plugs and push the bike up
and down the street to get the juices flowing. It looks stupid but it makes
sure that everything's fully lubed.
From: ralph@swmerc.rain.com (Ralph Merwin)
John Pinkham writes:
I think that when they have air in them they can't
pump anything - the air just swirls around the pump gears. The oil
makes the seal in the pump.
Ralph
Date: Thu, 19 May 94 12:37:43 +0200
>Since motorcycle oil pumps are rotary positive
displacement types, they
Well.... My pre-unit Triumph has a "plunger"
oil-pump... Two pistons pushing the oil. No rotary.
Espen
Date: 16 Feb 1994 16:37:58 U
Oops... I guess I thought you were talking about
the gearbox. My error. Haynes actually recommends multigrade (10-30 in
the winter, 20-50 in the summer) for the primary system. I would think
that despite all of the great lubrication and hydraulic properties of ATF
to support all of the neat gizmos in an automatic transmission, it would
break down rapidly when exposed to the high combustion temperature.
Although I must admit that I've never trusted
Haynes... I recall that they recommended 20-50W for the transmission of
my Fiat Spider 2000. The actual shop manual recommended 80-90W. I never
figured out if the haynes was wrong or if their engineers found that a
lighter oil was better in that transmission. The tranny in that car was
ok for as long as I had it, except for that one time when the gear shift
lever pulled out of the transmission while I was crossing the Throgs Neck
Bridge (NYC) at 1 am. I thought it was pretty funny, my girlfriend didn't.
Date: Wed, 16 Feb 94 16:00:52 -0700
Marty writes: Andrew, I saw your note about using
ATF in your triumph instead of 90W gear oil. I know that Haynes recommends
the 90W, isn't ATF pretty thin stuff?
Well Marty, that is the point, thinner is better,
I don't remember Haynes recommending 90W in the primary (gearbox yes, but
that is another chapter). I once made the mistake of putting 90W in the
primary and, I could NOT break the clutch free. The local Triumph shop
had quite a long laugh and recommened 30W engine oil. Worked better but
the line between dragging and slipping was very fine.
ATF may be thin, but it has very good lubricating
properties, Think about the requirements in an automatic transmission,
Gears, sometimes chains, clutch packs, hydraulic systems. and a well built
one will go 100,000 miles So I think that ATF is pretty good stuff.
Date: Thu, 17 Feb 94 09:46:18 GMT
Thought I'd post this just incase someone started
pouring ATF into their engine. I dont know enough about all British bikes
to say catagorically (sp?) but the assumption on this thred is that the
Primary Chaincase is seperate from the Engine, that is, it contains its
own Oil that does not circulate around the Engine. (Not by design anyhow).
Automatic Transmission Fluid provides perhapse
the thinist possible oil available which helps the Clutches in the Primary
Chaincases work without Dragging or Sliping. However, this oil is Totally
unsuitable for use in the actual Engine.
Date: Thu, 17 Feb 1994 08:19:06 -0600 (CST)
>Thought I'd post this just incase someone started
pouring ATF into their engine.
>Automatic Transmission Fluid provides perhapse
the thinist possible oil available
A valid point, at least for later model Triumphs,
which have three very small holes to allow engine breathing into the primary,
hence also allow some oil exchange. I've been wondering about this since
this thread started. Especially when talk got around to intentionally oiling
the clutch plates.
If you look at the placement of the level holes
on either a BSA, Norton, or Triumph primary, you'll find that with the
correct oil level only the chain should be lubricated. In fact, oily plates
will stick together something awful, as anyone who has experienced wet
sumping on later models of BSA or Triumph can attest.
The design of the clutch basket appears to be
such that most of the oil in the primary will be kept out of the clutch.
My local shop owner, Jim Stovall, who has been dealing Brit bikes since
the 50's, once told me that the clutches are actually meant to be run dry,
and that the oil in the primary is really there to benefit chain and sprockets.
Makes sense to me. Especially after having busted first gear in the Lightning
due to too much oil (wet sumping) crossing over into my primary case.
Date: Sat, 9 Apr 94 10:58:06 PDT
Hmmmm. Looks like time for another pontification.
This time, I want to share a rave with those of you who can pay attention
about: MULTI-GRADE-OILS:
True Story: Long ago, in days of yore (winter
of '67 or close), I was a student at UBC, working on finishing off a degree
in Industrial Education. (These were the days when there were still a few
people in the education system giving at least a little lip service to
the concept of teaching kids a few useful skills like determining which
end of the hammer to move things with, what's a hammerfore, etc.) Wellsir.
One of our courses was called Materials Science, and it was a Doozie. It
involved our using a laboratory that had every kind of testing machine
you can imagine in it - tensile strength pullers, rockwell hardness testers,
viscosimeters.............SNNNNNK! huh? oh yes, ummmmmmmm...... So, it
seems that one of the major ways to get through this course was to do a
Research Project. You could do it singly or in pairs, and the idea was
to dream up a plan to test and compare some kind of material or other.
So we had people mixing up tablets of concrete,
varying everything they could think of, then testing all the samples, making
charts, graphs, you name it, and then doing a bang-up presentation to the
rest of the group.... Side Trip: This same winter was the one when I discovered
Castrol GTX Multigrade 10W30. What a Concept! Oil that starts out thin
when cold, so it gets in all those tight little places, and gets thicker
as the engine warms up! Mirabile Dictu! - why din' _I_ think of that? Needless
to say, as soon as I heard of this miracle juice, I ran out and got some
for my aging 544 Volvo, and Got With The Programme.
Why Castrol? Some of my less-enlightened classmates
in the Auto shop seemed wont to tease me about my yuppieoid taste in lubricants.
They snickered out such remarks as, "ever heard of a Castrol Oil Refinery?
Ever hear of a Castrol Oil Tanker? Why don't you just use Allstate?", and
like that. But I was true. I knew that I'd seen Castrol signs at _ALL_
the big races, and that just _everybody_ used it. Besides, I just _loved_
the lovely BRG cans the regular Castrol came in, and it was a brand that
seemed to be mentioned in all the brit shop manuals, yet we could buy it
here. Unlike, say Duckham's, which I yearned to put in something someday.
It just_sounded_ SO _British_!
You will gather, and, I imagine, Understand, I
was a bit of a mechanical Anglophile in them days, and anything Brit was
just _too_ cool. If Texaco, or Exxon, ('scuse me-Esso), or Shell, had told
me they had figured out a way to make oil get thicker when it gets hotter,
I would have called bullshit, but (stand to attention, hand over heart)
_Castrol_ - mother's milk for motors, nectar of the gods, the Glen Fiddich
of Film Maintainers, the Haig and Haig of Hot Spots - no way! I'd defend
_these_ guys to the grave! Well. Back to Materials Testing 405. This being
an upper-year course, some of us were taking ourselves quite seriously
and going for the gusto with this thing. I can't even remember what your
humble correspondent did to slough his way through this assignment, going
for the customary 52% +/-2, as this looked like it could be a real time-consumer.
But what I _do_remember is the cute couple who decided to go overboard
and do a viscosity check on Every Motor Oil In The World.
Now, my friends and I had been doing viscosity
checks for some years. How we did it was to run up to the ski area on Mt.
Seymour, as fast as our MGA's, Triumphs, and even one AC Bristol (s) would
go. We would watch the oil pressure fall as the altitude rose, and compare
results. After a summer or two of the Mt. Seymour GP, run singly and in
various sub-groupings, and a couple of years of routine oil changes, we
were pretty well unanimous in our findings:
1) Fresh Oil changes make no difference to pressure
drops as things get hot.
2) The best oil at the time for keeping its act
together was Shell X-100.
The only other one that came close was Woodward's
Premium. (Woodward's was a local Department Store Chain in Vancouver) As
noone had been able to verify sightings of either Woodward's oil tankers,
or Woodward's refineries, this latter observation gave rise to speculation
that Woody was repackaging X-100. It should be said here that the climb
started after about a half hour of city driving, and lasted only for about
15 minutes at full tilt.
So this was not a long work-out, but it _was_
intense - lots of full throttle activity, and lots of r's. How does all
this relate to Materials Testing 405? Well, this was the original seat-of-the-pants
way to test
one material with which we had an interest, motor oil. But
of course, my colleagues in the testing lab had a more scientific, if considerably
less exciting, way to do it. I mentioned earlier, I think, that these guys
intended to squeak every possible mark from teacher for their efforts,
here. So they spared no difficulty. They holed up in the materials testing
lab for a couple of months, and they wrote friends all over the world,
and had said friends send them a quart of oil from places I'd never heard
of.
Yes, they had Duckham's. They had Castrol from
Aus, from Eng, and the local vintage. They had, in short, Many Kinds of
oil. And what they did with samples of every one was run it through a viscosity
index test. Starting at 0 C., and running it in 10 (or was it even 5?)
degree increments up to well over H2O boiling - 120 C or so. They of course
made a careful table of viscosity index at each step for each make _and_grade_
of oil - 5wt, 10wt, 20wt, 30wt, and each of the Multi-Grades.
Data? Did they have Data? They were _Smothered_
in Data! Of course, to make sense of all this data, they had to graph it
out, but they had so many brands and grades of oil it wouldn't fit on just
one graph. The hand-outs they gave each class member along with their presentation
would have cost them a bundle, if this had been in the days of Xerox for
the masses. It wasn't, though, so they just made their copy available for
all to peruse.
Charts, slides, overhead projector stuff was in
abundance, and there was no doubt in _anyone's_ mind that _these_were the
ne plus ultra, the champions of brown-nose, the winners of the contest
to see who could pull the most marks out of _this_ assignment! I mean,
it was Done To The Nuts! I had no doubt whatever that these guys had found
out Once and For All what is what with viscosity and heat. I imagine those
who have managed to keep the finger off the "n" key up to now will be wondering
what they found out. I remember I personally was waiting at the time to
find out just how well my favourite new magic multi motor oil stacked up.
How much thicker did it get? Did it start out at SAE15, and go to SAE40
when hot, or did it actually get thicker than that, and go to, say SAE45?
Well, as my cousin Vinnie likes to say, "Get ready
for a %#$@^^& suhprize." _NO_ multi-grade oil got thicker with temperature.
In fact, they all got thinner. In fact, most of them lost viscosity worse
than their straight grade counterparts.
Needless to say, no straight grade got thicker
either. It turned out that oil, amazingly enough, gets thinner as it gets
hotter. I know that I've read claims to the contrary on many an oilcan,
but, sorry, kids, that's just how it is. My personal theory is that the
oil companies, in trying to find a use for some fractional distillate(s)
that wouldn't fit into any normal SAEny category, hit upon the concept
of *Multigrade*, as in "We can't really figure out what grade this shit
is, maybe You can." Sort of like when some chemist noticed that this stuff
they had lots of but couldn't find a use for tasted a bit like orange juice,
kinda. Hey! Toss in a couple of astronaut commercials, a bit of good ol'
'Murcan hype, and Presto! You know the rest.
At any rate, ever since, I've gone back to straight
grade oil. Since I haven't had a car with a good oil pressure gauge, nor
a shot at that lovely little mountain road up the side of Seymour, nor
the inclination to drive like that (how nobody died i'll neverknow) I have
resorted to common sense in my choice of oils, and I use just a good quality
straight 40 in everything in summer, and 10/30 in winter, 'cause I live
in a small town, and I don't drive very far in winter.
My Triumphs, my Lincoln, my '64 283 Chev, and
my Morris Minor get RPM Delo 40, 'cause there's lots around (logging town),
and besides, I've seen Chevron refineries. And what the hay - blue's a
nice colour, too!
Date: Sun, 10 Apr 1994 15:21:31 -0700 (PDT)
I don't think multi-grade oil was ever claimed
to get thicker as it warmed up.
Rather 15W-50 is supposed to be the viscosity
of 15 weight oil when it is cold, and the viscosity of 50 weight when it
is hot. Cold 15 weight oil is more viscous that hot 50 weight oil.
The thing is, cold 15 weight oil is a lot less
viscous than cold 50 weight oil, which is why the multigrade oils are supposedly
better in the cold. I use Mobil 1 in my Commando. Anyone know any reason
why I shouldn't do this? Date:
Mon, 11 Apr 1994 11:20:41 -0800
My workshop manual recommends Esso 50 in summer,
Esso 40 in winter.
Straight oils for roller big ends and gauze strainers,
particularly with iron heads. 120C is cool..... Multigrades for shell bearings
and paper oil filters and high capacity oil pumps.
Date: Mon, 11 Apr 1994 16:54:06 -0700 (PDT)
On Mon, 11 Apr 1994 brit-iron@indiana.edu wrote
That's my understanding of the way it works too.
> I use Mobil 1 in my Commando. Anyone know any
reason why I shouldn't do this?
Steve I tried the Spectro Gold 4+ (whatever the
designation-- it's a straight synthetic) in my Ducati and a Beemer and
I could swear I had increased leaking. I switched back to Castrol for both.
My Commando is actually leakfree except for long high speed runs when I
get weeping from the rocker box covers, one of the oil lines and a few
odd spots and I'd like to keep it that way.
But the testing on Mobil 1 certainly has been
impressive and I may give it a try too. It's not so easy to find however;
I tried two auto shops last week with no luck. Someone said that Mobil
pulled out of CA and so it's been harder to find the oil. Is this true?
Date: Tue, 12 Apr 1994 08:29:42 +0800
>On Mon, 11 Apr 1994 brit-iron@indiana.edu wrote
That's my understanding of the way it works too.
Given the above I run my T140 on a Castrol oil
thats marketed as GP50 in Australia I'm pretty sure its 20/50. I live in
a warm/hot climate and have put an oil cooler on the bike. Should I consider
another oil? Its the one my Brit specialist shop recommends. (I also use
it in my V8 Rover and what the similarity between the 2 engines is - I
have no idea)
Date: Mon, 11 Apr 1994 17:41:41 -0800
At 8:29 AM 4/12/94 +0800, Jamie Hamilton wrote:
>>That's my understanding of the way it works
too.
I used GP50 a couple of times. I though it was
50W monograde. It says it on the can somewhere.
Date: Mon, 11 Apr 94 17:43:58 PDT
> I tried the Spectro Gold 4+ (whatever the designation--
it's a straight
I had the same experience quite a few years ago
when I tried synthetic oil in my R75/5. Although I didn't appreciate it
at the time ( not yet Briticized ), the Beemer began to take on some British
traits. Went back to "normal" oil and never needed the remainder of that
box of cat litter until I got a "real" British bike.
Date: Tue, 12 Apr 94 09:54:10 -0600
It is very interesting the reocurrence of oil
debates on the net. As stated before, I used to work for Cummins Engine
company and the inner sanctum determined the dead dinosaurs were just that.
The differentiation is in the additives. Of course we are talking dead
dinosaurs here.
Oil does its job by separating the journal from
the bushing with a film that usually prevents contact. Any fluid could
fulfill this duty, but oil has a high film strength. The major job of the
oil pump is to provide cool (relative here) oil to replace the rapidly
heating oil in the bearing. In fact if a fluid would maintain its film
strength and not boil away (assuming the bearing was rated at a high enough
temp you would not need a fluid pump).
The additives can slightly modify boiling point
and film strength, but not much. The most important thing one can do is
to keep clean oil in an engine. this means frequent oil changes and to
me that means the cheapest dead dinosaurs available. (usually never more
than $0.70 a quart.
I know that some folks get passionate about a
brand of oil and stick to it, but as stated before the additives are the
differentiator and these additives are usually out to lunch at 2k miles.
So cheap oil and frequent changes are the secret.
Date: Tue, 12 Apr 94 8:35:33 PST
Andrew Wolf:
Especially if the bike isn't equipped with an
oil filter otherwise the SOP is 3K btw changes.
None of my Triumphs had an oil filter, just a
screen. In fact, I can't recall any Britbikes using oil filters unless
they were aftermarket products. Kendall 20/50 oil was my passion. :-)
Date: Tue, 12 Apr 94 09:41:34 PDT
Andrew Wolf sez:
Andrew, I agree more or less with what you say.
Bikes are expensive. Very small but critical parts like bushings and bearings
require the very best in terms of clean, high quality products to allow
them to do their job.
Bikes are expensive, oil is cheap, cheap, cheap.
I read the manuals on the new bikes and they suggest oil changes at incredible
mileages. Maybe yes, maybe no. My philosophy is on a modern bike say an
R100 GS is to change the oil every thousand miles and the filter every
other oil change.
For my vintage machines (no filter) I change the
oil every 800-1000 miles. Four litres of Castrol 20x50 costs about $7.50.
That's about a pint and a half of beer in the
pub. Pretty cheap maintenance if you ask me.
In an old Beemer, for example the oil get thrown
about by a couple of perverse contraptions called slingers. Dirty oil tends
to get clogged up there and prevents them from doing their job. Result,
reduced oil flow, and eventual bye-bye crankshaft. (very hard to replace
these days).
I'll stick to the frequent oil change model myself.
As for cheap oil---you'll have to do some convincing here. There are a
number of studies which seem to show that there is some differences between
oils in their ability to maintain viscosity under various circumstances.
Most of those studies seem to indicate that within reason you get what
you pay for. Any comments?
Derek
Date: Tue, 12 Apr 94 12:00:46 CDT
Somewhere out there there's BOUND to be someone
who knows what he's talking about - but until then here's my $.02 qualified
only by "what my Daddy told me at his knee" (Dad was a Production Chemist
for Texaco) and other experiences, as well as general modification of fact
by the passage of time.
There are two types of oils. Blended and Vacuum
refined.
Most oils are blended, Pennsylvanian oils for
instance are very light oils and are blended with heavier "bunker" oils
to make the rating. Saconey (don't know how to spell it) Oil Company created
vacuum refining - which taped the oil out of the refining process at the
right weight. Mobil bought Saconey (remember Saconey-Mobil?) and their
better oil (and Texaco Havoline) are vacuum refined.
Experience: Had a buddy who liked to pull a BIG
BOAT down to South Padre Island from here at HIGH SPEEDS with his HOTROD.
He confirmed that Havoline was the only oil he found that kept oil pressure
up after 90mph runs across the King Ranch in the middle of summer. Also
knew a Harley rider who commented on his oil tank having a foam head just
like beer after using Penzoil for a long ride. I believe I remember Dad
commenting on how multigrade oils worked - their molecules curled up has
they were heated, therefore the product did not thin out as rapidly as
single weight oils. This gives the effect of "thin" oil when cold and "thicker"
oil when hot. I remember that he said that the multiweight were never really
quite as "thick" as single weight ones.
Roller and ball bearings need different oiling
than shell bearings. Shell bearings ride on a "sea" of oil, and thinner
oils and high pressures make them work. Roller berings - like the crank
and rod bearings in my Indian need a dribble of oil to keep going, and
THICK IS GOOD.
The Indian oil pumps through '47 were really just
a screw gear metering gravity flow from the oil tank. Maybe too thick oil
is why the off side crank bushings go out on the BSA A65's? My '49 Chevy
doesn't even have an oil filter. I was going to add one when I was a kid
and pop suggested that instead I invest the money in changing the oil as
often as possible - you can buy a lot of oil for the cost of a filter.
He suggested every 3000 miles.
Date: Tue, 12 Apr 1994 11:15:29 -0700
Graham wrote:
Tridents and Rocket 3's have a lovely disposable
paper cartridge filter hidden under the engine, as well as the traditional
sump screen. They are easy to overlook. I too am now a believer in frequent
oil changes.I try to do it when the odometer reaches a multiple of 2000
miles.
Date: Tue, 12 Apr 94 13:08:43 CDT
From Graeme:
Tsk, tsk, how soon they forget the Norton Commando.
Hey! that would have been a great trivia question...
Date: Tue, 12 Apr 94 12:33:00 -0600
Andrew Wolf sez:
Derek replies:
>Derek
Well Derek, as you may have noticed, the differentiator
is additives. Now certain additives hold particles in suspension (detergents),
others modify viscosity (STP), others counteract the effects of combustion
by products (acids, water, etc.), and others just for the hell of it.
I do NOT run my engines HARD, yes I live in the
desert, but I do not overheat my engines by running VERY fast or under
hard load. Basically I am your middle of the road rider/driver. I don't
need all of those wonderful properties that the oil resellers provide,
besides that every study done on additives show that for a 4 quart sump
that the additives in a sound engine are consumed in < 2,000 Miles.
Since I change my oil at 1,500 mile intervals,
no matter how cheap the oil it still has the basic additive package available.
So I tend not to believe in using oil for great distances >5,000 miles
between changes, I also have seen "studies" on oil, however all have been
in Auto and Motorcycle magazines and after taking a critical look at thier
'impartiality' I seriously doubt the whores who write for these magazines
and take thier income from advertizing these same products.
An interesting aside. Several friends who run
Mobil one beleive that they can really get 25,000 miles per oil change!!!!
For one this meant 3 years of low milage driving. When the engine was torn
down we found much evidence to suggest the damage was done by corrosion.
But talking oil does arouse some real passions and it is cheap enough,
so no matter the cost of the oil it is still CHEAP insurance.
Date: Tue, 12 Apr 94 14:28:10 CDT
Can't agree more with Andrew Wolf and others.
After pulling the crankshaft plug on the Daytona,
I found a group of sludge and spooge in the crank passage. More than enough
to frighten the daylights out of me. How'd oil get through?
As oil filters go, the crank is a tough one to
clean. I have the habit of changing oil every month - a little extreme
perhaps, but it's easy to remember and having ridden without a speedo for
years, made it easier than rough guesses. I love my Tiger and figure whatever
the cost of oil, a rebuild is more costly. Besides, I get more Castrol
hats and patches that way....
Date: 12 Apr 94 15:59:00 EDT
Since I have yet to get the Gold Star I am yearning
for I don't have any recent experience with multi-grade oils in an old
Brit. Bike. I do however, have a 1953 Riley RMF and I have some expeerience
with it. The engine has NOT been rebuilt since I bought the car (1971)
but it runs well.
With single grade oil the oil pressure would go
down to almost nothing at an idle after the engine got hot in the summertime.
I ended up going to Castrol 20w-50 and now even at an idle I have about
15-20psi and as soon as the engine is speeded-up the oil pressure goes
up and stays up at very close to the spec. in the manual (Since I seem
to be suffering from CRS at the moment I can't remember exactly what pressure
that is :-) )
The bottom line is that this oil has served me
well in my old Riley and if I had a similar problem in an old Brit Bike
I think I would try the same solution.
Date: Wed, 13 Apr 94 05:06:48 EDT
All this discussion on oil seems to have left
out the rather significant technological advance of *Synthetic Oils*. Now
I dont claim to be any kind of expert, and the only oil advice my daddy
ever gave me was that it doesn't wash out of the living room rug, so I
better take those damn boots off before I go walking through HIS house...
BUT, I do work in a cycle shop and i have tried to do a little amateur
investigations on the matter of synthetic oils.
One of the benefits of British Machinery is that
the primary drive is often isolated from the engine oil; thus the main
problem that most motorcycles have with synthetics is avoided: clutch malfunction.
The question than becomes purely a matter of viscosity and thermal conductivity,
and here there is NO doubt: almost any automotive synthetic oil retains
its viscosity longer than any petroleum based oil, whether its made especially
for motorcycles or not (Spectro 4 for example).
I have read two independant studies that concluded
this so I at least am convinced. My boss at work however continues to stock
and use Golden Spectro and Spectro 4 almost exclusively and he tells me
that there's more to oil than viscosity breakdown - but aside from cleaning
additives and such I have no idea what he's talking about. I ran Mobil
1 synthetic in my Norton and noticed that the bike seemed to like me a
little bit better for it... until she threw a rod that is. (just kidding)
Date: Wed, 13 Apr 94 14:23:42 EDT
>From Chevron USA catalog: "Chevron will pay for
*any* engine damage directly
This oil is rated API CE,CD,CD-II/SG and passes
all the Cummins,Catepillar,Mack, and Detroit-Diesel performance tests.
Available in 15W-40 for about $12.50 / 12 quarts. Also meets Porsche,Mercedes,Jaguar,
and a long list of US, European, and Japanese manufacturers' specs. I use
it in my Ford diesel with close to 400,000 miles on original engine. Chevron
Lube-Tek Hot Line: 1-800-582-3835.
Date: Fri, 15 Apr 94 16:54 EDT
>I know that some folks get passionate about a
brand of oil and stick to it, but as
I've never been passionate about a brand of oil,
but I am a fan of synthetics. The theory is there is less high temperature
breakdown, and I do thrash my bikes, so I figure the extra cost compared
to what I pay for parts for some of my shitboxes isn't that much of a burden.
But I definately agree, change early change often,
change the oil as often as humanly possible and the engine will last forever.
Date: Fri, 15 Apr 94 16:58 EDT
>Four litres of Castrol 20x50 costs about $7.50.
That's about a pint and a half of beer
Well, I didn't realize good Castrol was so cheap.
I guess I'll switch from Guiness to Castrol in the beeza.
Date: 15 Apr 1994 16:41:25 U
Wow, everyone seems to be praising the multigrades.
I think my partiality to multi-grades was always the recommended lubricant
data chart in Haynes manuals which wave the Castrol GTX banner and not
anything technical. However, I did read an interesting technical blurb
on wreck.autos.vw that discussed the comparison of multigrades and straight
weights.
The bottom line was that a 10W-50 multigrade was
simply a 10 weight oil with a bunch of polymers dumped into it so that
the oil would artificially thicken to a 50 weight when it got hot. These
hooligan polymers will tend to write graffiti on your cylinder walls and
look up your piston skirts on the upstroke.
Seriously, It doesn't make sense that a hot 10W-50
would have as favorable tribological (is that a word?), heat transfer,
and cleaning properties as a straight 50. The author recommend using straight
when temperature variations are relatively low (which is practically nowhere
in the US), and minimizing the spread of the multigrade when larger temperature
variations are expected and a multigrade must be used (for cold cranking).
I know I've heard a lot about people running castrol
multigrade for beaucoup miles, but I have a feeling that they are just
meticulous about frequent changes and preventative maintenance... one may
be able to stretch engine life even farther by keeping multigrade use to
a minimum.
Date: Sat, 16 Apr 94 08:44:04 PDT
On frequent Oil changes: I read a story in (I
think) Car And Driver many years ago reporting on a paper some engineer
at Ford wrote up for the SAE. Seems he noticed a correlation between test-engine
blow-ups and fresh oil changes, looked into it, and sho' 'nuff.........
Postulated that oil needs a break-in period, and the conclusion was that
if you're at a racing event, and there's free oil being offered by some
maker or another, take the oil by all means, but don't change your oil
before a race.
Leave the old oil in there when pounding on it;
change oil when the immediate future is lighter practice, driving it on
the street, like that.
My personal feeling on changes has always been
that running an engine cold produces acids and other ugly stuff you can't
see, and that the oil gets rid of these when it gets up to temp by evaporation.
If you're doing lots of short hauls, you gotta throw that acidy oil away
(or maybe just sit it on the stove at 150 F. or so for a few hours?), and
replace it with something a little less corrupted. But if you're doing
a good haul, where the thing gets to run hot for at least as long every
time as it did cold, you can stretch it longer. Either way, I always change
when it gets dirty, unless of course it's a diesel - who wants to change
their oil every half-hour? Dirty to me means showing any sign of black
- usually about 1500 miles on a bike.
Date: Mon, 18 Apr 1994 16:01:12 -0800
At 4:41 PM 4/15/94 +0000, Marty Ross wrote:
I get first kick starting with straight 50W with
icicles on the barrel. I think this multigrade-starts-good-when-cold nonsense
only applies to those newfangled wet sump engines.
Date: 19 Apr 94 11:05:36 MESZ
If I use a multigrade in my Thunderbird (iron
head) its okay until the engine gets hot. After a decent thrash (50/60
miles or so) the egine sounds like a bag of nails. If I use straight 50
grade it doesn't get anything like so noisy when hot. Maybe multigrades
aren't suited to the temperatures/clearances in older engines?
By comparison, the Commando runs okay on 20w50,
but the Velo also seems to prefer monograde oil.
Date: Thu, 17 Feb 94 17:08:58 GMT
Just about the first 'getting your hands dirty'
thing the proud new Norton Commando owner does, is to check and top-up
the Oil in the Oil Tank. The second thing that same owner does, is drive
down to the Garage to pick up a new air filter.
You see, if the bike is left standing, oil will
slowly drain down from the oil tank, through the oil feed lines and the
pump and into the bottom of the crankcase, or sump. So before our new owner
rides off into the sunset, he dutifully checks the oil level, finds not-a-drop
on the end of the dip stick and proceeds to fill the tank until the level
lies exactly half way between the upper and lower marks.
Now, our frendly designers back at Norton were
wondering where to put the Oil Tank vent pipe and decided, to reduce emmisions
for the US Market, the only place they could vent the fumes was back into
the engine through the intake. (Well, the air box is next to the oil tank
right.)
The next part of the story is fairly obvious,
once the engine starts it emptys the crankcases oil back into the tank,
this is a dry sump engine. The oil overflows through the breather into
the airbox, and increases the turnover of said local garage.
And thus, the first thing the new owner discovers
about the bike is; to read the small blue sticker on the frame next to
the oil filler, or to always run the engine before checking the Oil.
There have been numerious owner modifications
in pursuit of a fix. The most obvious and often used is to extend the vent
pipe so it hangs below the engine, venting into the air or onto the pavement.
I have even seen several people put a small tap into the Oil feed, and
operate it like the petrol tap. We don't need to dwell on the negitive
aspects of this arrangement to long though. Which brings us to the Non
Return Valve, a small one-way valve. A Ballbearing held against a seal
by a spring which only lets the oil go one way and thus prevents the oil
draining down from the tank.
The only thing you can get wrong is to install
the thing the wrong way round. Another item available from RGM Motors,
at 12 English Pounds. N.B. Mk3 Commandos had a Non return Valve as part
of the timing cover, and there's a roumor that if you bring the engine
to compression it stops the wet sumping. (Although this may only work with
timed breathers).
Date: Fri, 18 Feb 94 8:27:21 PST
>Peter Aslan wrote:
I have used the technique of bringing the engine
to full compression on return to the garage and it has practically eliminated
the wet sumping that I used to experience on my MKIIA.
Date: Thu, 21 Apr 1994 13:17:01 +0600
quote from "Velocette" by Rod Burris: "A piston
engine acts as as unintentional air pump. The problem is more acute in
a single cylinder engine than in say, a four, where the variation in crankcase
volume and therefore pressure, is less (due to some pistons moving upwards
and some downwards).
These changes in pressure generally contribute
to oil leakage. One solution was to fit fibreglass shields over the mess.
* "At first the new engine seemed not to need a more complicated breather
system than one leading to the chaincase via mainshaft drillings. However,
it was not until the mid-1960s that it was discovered that at certain RPMs
crankcase pressure was preventing oil drainage from the cylinder head and
rocker box. this in turn contributed to oil leakage especially down the
cylinder head studs and possibly affecting carburation.
An alteration had already been made to the cylinder
stud nut sealing by then. "A variety of breathers were tried but the system
introduced in Oct. 1966..." (you say yours is a 65?) "... consisted of
a 1/2" diameter balance hole between the timing chest and the crankcase
(behind the cam wheel). An outlet from below the magneto, which can be
added by fitting an adaptor into a 1/4" BSP tapped hole, allowed the connection
of a 1/2" bore X 21.375" long hose. "the oil tank had a 5/16" tube welded
to the top, to accept the hose. Again, this can be fitted or the existing
tank breather at the bottom end used. "A 5/16" bore hose X 27.5" long led
from the tank to the rear of the machine.
An earlier tank breather had been used to lubriacte
the rear chain. "Opinion varies as to the importance of these dimensions.
Reg Orpin was not convinced until an incident ocurred at Barcelona. In
the early hours of the morning he noticed that an oil mist ws very obvious
as it pumped out of the extra long tank breather. The breather acted, he
claims, rather like a megaphone and had an extractor effect. Reverting
to a shorter hose reduced oil losses by this route. The technical explanation
is tied up with resonating air columns." and the manuals all say to check
blockage of vent tubes, and of course cleaning the suction filter and the
tank filter.
I am taking on the task this week of getting my
friend's 69 Venom back on the road (coil ignition model) it's really a
simple job, as she broke the kickstart return spring, parked the bike last
year and left it in the garage. (and now with Guzzi problems, she is talking
of buying a new bike, god forbid. no, dear the boy who kept it running
'til now doesn't come with it.)
I've already done the minor tune-up stuff, carb
and such, and have a new return spring in my hot little hands as of this
moment. it goes in later today. This bike does not really leak that much
oil, but does unfortunately leak gas, uh, petrol, i think the tank needs
a fix. Which means new paint, but she claims there is a VW match for Velo
blue. *regarding these fibreglass things, i just saw them for the first
time in the corner of the garage. yuck.
Date: Thu, 21 Apr 94 16:33:33 CDT
While assembling the Daytona motor, I came across
reference to the "Timed Breather Assemblies"
There were none on my motor.
Ever, as far as I can tell.
What's the deal?
Date: Thu, 21 Apr 1994 16:48:12 -0500 (EST)
Terry Drehmel {x68282 CF/ENG} writes:
On the BSA unit twins there is a small rotating
disk at the end of the camshaft with two opposing triangular holes like
a spice shaker that allows the pressure generated by the two pistons coming
down simultaneously to escape. Otherwise the pistons would be constantly
compressing and uncompressing the air inside the engine cases. Not only
would this be a waste of energy, it could also force oil out at the weakest
points.
Date: Thu, 21 Apr 94 18:11 EDT
The timed breather on the daytona was driven off
the exhaust cam. On the left side of the motor there was a spigot that
the breather tube attached to. The breather on those bikes changed pretty
rapidly in the late 60's/early 70's, I can never remember which they had
when, and our Daytonas are such piles of parts I have trouble finding the
breather on the bike when it's in front of me.
Right behind the barrels on the top of the gearbox
(sort of) there's one place where a breather might or might not have been,
on one of our bikes there's an undrilled casting bump. I think they vented
it through the primary on some bikes (actually that might be on the scheme
I just described), and on others I think they vented down around the sprocket
somewhere.
Date: Fri, 22 Apr 94 08:12:34 CDT
Oil Breathers: My GoldWing has a neat feature
with the oil breather tube. It loops up over the engine, then terminates
in a small (1"x1.5") plastic cylinder behind the engine and lower than
the output. Once or twice a year you remove and drain the cylinder, which
is usually full of water (condesation from the engine) but without any
major oil contamination.
Might just be that a 4 cylinder is better balanced
so needs less breathing, but might be an interesting experiment on a twin.
From: Pete Serrino
>Try caustic soda. Etc...
From: Latte' Jed Right!
From: Peter Snidal
>Right! Caustic Soda, AKA lye, AKA drano! It
eats aluminium and leaves steel, I
>remember this from the time I tried to etch
PC boards in a disposable roasting pan.
Subject: Combat Cams - identifying thereof
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 1995 17:05:09 +0100 (BST)
djw12@leicester.ac.uk
From: kaak@inforamp.net (Klaus Kaak)
i didn't know that there was anything other than
a single timing chain.how
long did norton use a double rowed cam chain?
my reply referred to single chains & I believe that the bonded tensioner
will give best service here.thanks for illuminating me!
Klaus
Subject: camchain and sprockets
dannysore
From: Peter Azlan <pa@gx2.uk.mdis.com>
According to the manuals, this task should be
tackled every 5K miles. The notes that follow refer to a Mk 2, or pre electric
start commando, Mk 3 Timing covers have a little inspection cover that
looks like it's for checking the tension without all of the following.
You can probably fit a Mk 3 cover to earlier engines, and get the built
in anti-drain valve, but it costs about 70 pounds and you start to worry
about originality, and whether the bike is going to be the same bike you
originally bought.
Once inside, you are now able to check the tension
on the Cam Chain.
When the cover is off, oil will seep from the
drilling in the crancases, blank this off. Also plug the end of the crankshaft
to stop all oil from draining.
Regards Peter Aslan, aka Captain Norton.
Date: Fri, 13 May 94 02:13:04 EDT
Date: Mon, 6 Jun 94 14:31:06 EDT
From: Peter Azlan <pa@gx2.uk.mdis.com>
Date: Fri, 10 Jun 94 01:17:36 EDT
Raul -- '72 Commando Interstate
CAMCHAIN
Subject: Re: auto camchain tensioner / rerun
From: John Pinkham
The cost of the automatic cam chain tensioner
is $79.95 US including shipping and handling (might need a bit more to
ship it to Blighty). The address is RMA Engineering,447 Santa Mesa Drive,
San Jose, California, 95123. Tele: (408) 578-4032. Lady answers with crying
baby in background. It comes with *good* instructions, 6 pages of 'em,
well illustrated. The device consists of a mounting bracket which hold
a spring loaded wedge. Keyed to the wedge is the nylon shoe, impregnated
with solid lubricant. Only metal removal is said to be the lower dowel
pin boss ( use a, pardon the expression, bastard file for this).
Have new oil pump seals, etc. On hand before commencing the project.
From: Peter Azlan <pa@gx2.uk.mdis.com>
watch the oil spurt out, and no I'm not sure
it was fully primed with oil when I had finished.
flying around my mind, bronze bushes running
dry, moltern pistons.
transparent pipe). Then screwe the banjo, washers
and oil feed back onto the timing cover. Next I looked furtively around
the garage for somthing to pump the oil.
strobe showed a much more consistent flash, less
slack in the chain, (till the rubber face decides to go for a walk).
From: John Pinkham <John.Pinkham@lambada.oit.unc.edu>
From: mason@ftp.com (Latte' Jed)
> should be self-priming. Just remove the sparkplugs
and use the kickstarter
> to motor the engine. Or put the bike up on
the kickstand in 4th gear and
> rotate the rear tyre. So why bother injecting
oil down rocker feed pipes,
> filling the pump with Vaseline, etc?
Date: Wed, 18 May 94 15:31:19 PDT
>
> Since motorcycle oil pumps are rotary positive
displacement types, they
> should be self-priming. Just remove the sparkplugs
and use the kickstarter
> to motor the engine. Or put the bike up on
the kickstand in 4th gear and
> rotate the rear tyre. So why bother injecting
oil down rocker feed pipes,
> filling the pump with Vaseline, etc?
From: espen@itekiris.kjem.unit.no (Espen Olsen)
>should be self-priming. Just remove the sparkplugs
and use the kickstarter
>to motor the engine. Or put the bike up on the
kickstand in 4th gear and
>rotate the rear tyre. So why bother injecting
oil down rocker feed pipes,
>filling the pump with Vaseline, etc?
LA6MGA/LA1K
DoD#7962
Disclaimer?? What disclaimer?
From: Marty Ross
From: Andrew Wolf
From: Peter Aslan
From: Jeff Achenbach
>I dont know enough about all British bikes to
say catagorically (sp?) but the
>assumption on this thred is that the Primary
Chaincase is seperate from the Engine,
>that is, it contains its own Oil that does not
circulate around the Engine. (Not by
>design anyhow).
>which helps the Clutches in the Primary Chaincases
work without Dragging or
>Sliping. However, this oil is Totally unsuitable
for use in the actual Engine.
From: "Pete Snidal"
From: Steve Moseley
From: alastair@cadence.com (Alastair Young)
From: Nancy J Caputo
> I don't think multi-grade oil was ever claimed
to get thicker as it
> warmed up. Rather 15W-50 is supposed to be
the viscosity of 15 weight oil
> when it is cold, and the viscosity of 50 weight
when it is hot. Cold 15
> weight oil is more viscous that hot 50 weight
oil. The thing is, cold 15
> weight oil is a lot less viscous than cold
50 weight oil, which is why
> the multigrade oils are supposedly better in
the cold.
From: jamieh@uniwa.uwa.edu.au (Jamie Hamilton)
>> I don't think multi-grade oil was ever claimed
to get thicker as it
>> warmed up. Rather 15W-50 is supposed to be
the viscosity of 15 weight oil
>> when it is cold, and the viscosity of 50 weight
when it is hot. Cold 15
>> weight oil is more viscous that hot 50 weight
oil. The thing is, cold 15
>> weight oil is a lot less viscous than cold
50 weight oil, which is why
>> the multigrade oils are supposedly better
in the cold.
From: alastair@cadence.com (Alastair Young)
>>On Mon, 11 Apr 1994 brit-iron@indiana.edu wrote
>>> I don't think multi-grade oil was ever claimed
to get thicker as it
>>> warmed up. Rather 15W-50 is supposed to be
the viscosity of 15 weight oil
>>> when it is cold, and the viscosity of 50
weight when it is hot. Cold 15
>>> weight oil is more viscous that hot 50 weight
oil. The thing is, cold 15
>>> weight oil is a lot less viscous than cold
50 weight oil, which is why
>>> the multigrade oils are supposedly better
in the cold.
>>>
>>Given the above
>>I run my T140 on a Castrol oil thats marketed
as GP50 in Australia I'm
>>pretty sure its 20/50. I live in a warm/hot
climate and have put an oil
>>cooler on the bike. Should I consider another
oil? Its the one my Brit
>>specialist shop recommends. (I also use it
in my V8 Rover and what the
>>similarity between the 2 engines is - I have
no idea)
From: John Bria
> synthetic) in my Ducati and a Beemer and I
could swear I had increased
> leaking.
From: Your Name Here
From: Graeme Harrison
>I know that some folks get passionate about
a brand of oil and stick to it, but as
>stated before the additives are the differentiator
and these additives are usually out to
>lunch at 2k miles. So cheap oil and frequent
changes are the secret.
From: DHAMLET@MFOR01.FOR.GOV.BC.CA
> The most important thing one can do is to keep
clean oil in an engine. this means
>frequent oil changes and to me that means the
cheapest dead dinosaurs available.
>(usually never more than $0.70 a quart.
From: kichline@mpd.tandem.com (Chuck Kichline)
From: rdb@strata.com (Robert D. Burget)
> None of my Triumphs had an oil filter, just
a screen. In fact, I can't recall any
>Britbikes using oil filters unless they were
aftermarket products.
From: unisql!brg@cs.utexas.edu (Bruce Graham)
>Especially if the bike isn't equipped with an
oil filter otherwise the SOP is 3K btw
>changes. None of my Triumphs had an oil filter,
just a screen. In fact, I can't recall
>any Britbikes using oil filters unless they
were aftermarket products. Kendall 20/50
>oil was my passion. :-)
From: Your Name Here
>>The most important thing one can do is to keep
clean oil in an engine. this means
>>frequent oil changes and to me that means the
cheapest dead dinosaurs available.
>>(usually never more than $0.70 a quart.
>Andrew, I agree more or less with what you say.
Bikes are expensive. Very small but
>critical parts like bushings and bearings require
the very best in terms of clean, high
>quality products to allow them to do their job.
Bikes are expensive, oil is cheap,
>cheap, cheap. I read the manuals on the new
bikes and they suggest oil changes at
>incredible mileages. Maybe yes, maybe no. My
philosophy is on a modern bike say
>an R100 GS is to change the oil every thousand
miles and the filter every other
>oil change. For my vintage machines (no filter)
I change the oil every 800-100 miles.
>Four litres of Castrol 20x50 costs about $7.50.
That's about a pint and a half of beer
>in the pub. Pretty cheap maintenance if you
ask me.
>In an old Beemer, for example the oil get thrown
about by a couple of perverse
>contraptions called slingers. Dirty oil tends
to get clogged up there and prevents
>them from doing their job. Result, reduced oil
flow, and eventual bye-bye crankshaft.
>(very hard to replace these days). I'll stick
to the frequent oil change model myself.
>As for cheap oil---you'll have to do some convincing
here. There are a number of
>studies which seem to show that there is some
differences between oils in their ability
>to maintain viscosity under various circumstances.
Most of those studies seem to
>indicate that within reason you get what you
pay for. Any comments?
From: clem@romulus.cray.com (Terry Drehmel
{x68282 CF/ENG})
From: roddy@diana.dt.navy.mil
From: bman1@aol.com
From: John Pinkham
>caused by a deficiency in DELO 400 PLUS Motor
Oil, when the engine is used under
>normal operating conditions."
From: mason@ftp.com (Latte' Jed)
>stated before the additives are the differentiator
and these additives are usually out to
>lunch at 2k miles. So cheap oil and frequent
changes are the secret.
From: mason@ftp.com (Latte' Jed)
>in the pub. Pretty cheap maintenance if you
ask me.
From: "Marty Ross"
From: "Pete Snidal"
>Wow, everyone seems to be praising the multigrades.
I think my partiality to multi-
>grades was always the recommended lubricant
data chart in Haynes manuals which
>wave the Castrol GTX banner and not anything
technical. Not me.
>However, I did read an interesting technical
blurb on wreck.autos.vw that
>discussed the comparison of multigrades and
straight weights. The bottom
>line was that a 10W-50 multigrade was simply
a 10 weight oil with a bunch of
>polymers dumped into it so that the oil would
artificially thicken to a 50
>weight when it got hot. These hooligan polymers
will tend to write graffiti
>on your cylinder walls and look up your piston
skirts on the upstroke.
>Seriously, It doesn't make sense that a hot
10W-50 would have as favorable
>tribological (is that a word?), heat transfer,
and cleaning properties as a
>straight 50. Drill a well and pump your own,
I say :-)
>The author recommend using straight when temperature
variations are
>relatively low (which is practically nowhere
in the US), and minimizing the
>spread of the multigrade when larger temperature
variations are expected and
>a multigrade must be used (for cold cranking).
From: tsumner@acorn.co.uk (Tony Sumner)
From: Peter Aslan
From: John Bria
>N.B. Mk3 Commandos had a Non return Valve as
part of the timing cover, and
>there's a roumor that if you bring the engine
to compression it stops the wet sumping.
>(Although this may only work with timed breathers).
From: magnetic@netcom.com (Jonathan Segel)
From: clem@romulus.cray.com (Terry Drehmel
{x68282 CF/ENG})
From: Chuck Stringer
> While assembling the Daytona motor, I came
across reference to the "Timed
> Breather Assemblies" There were none on my
motor. Ever, as far as I can tell.
> What's the deal?
From: mason@ftp.com (Latte' Jed)
From: kichline@mpd.tandem.com (Chuck Kichline)