british-cars
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: those SU valve thingies

To: british-cars@hoosier
Subject: Re: those SU valve thingies
From: jeffreys_m_j@bt-web.bt.co.uk
Date: Tue, 22 Oct 1991 16:13:11 +0100
From:   NAME: Mike Jeffreys         [DAT31 ]
        FUNC: DAT31                           
        TEL: 0473-645609                      <JEFFREYS M J AT WEB AT WEBCS>
To:     british-cars@hoosier.utah.edu@unet


Having read the various mailings on dealing with leaking over-run valves in 
the butterfly by just soldering them shut I offer my tuppence worth:-

Bit of background from the interesting mailing on 'TR-7 and TR-8 history' 
which is applicable to most newish SUs.

>On both engine types the SU carburettor spindles wear and may cause
>sticking throttles, while TR7s with an over-run valve in the butterfly
>can also suffer slow throttle closing action; the first requires a
>rebuild, the second can also be solved by soldering the valve closed.

Addressing the the first problem is fairly easy:-

        a) if only the spindle is worn, buy a new one (cheap and easy to 
           fit),

        b) if the SU casing is worn, have it rebushed (30 pounds in UK).

What this means is that an SU has an indefinite lifetime if you pay a 
fairly small reconditioning charge (I assume there are SU reconditioners 
over the 'pond') every 10 years or so.

The second problem can be addressed as said, i.e., soldering. My opinion is 
that it is easier, safer, more efficient (and can release more power to the 
car) if one just buys a new valveless butterfly. I have done this to all my 
SU carbs and, in the UK, the butterflies cost about 5 pounds each. Why is my 
method better?

        a) easier, because only a screwdriver is needed (no military spec 
           soldering iron needed),

        b) safer, because I wouldn't fancy a lump of solder falling into 
           the engine if the soldering was suspect (dry),

        c) efficient, a large lump of solder on the surface of the butterfly 
           must cause unwanted turbulence in the inlet manifold,

        d) more power, on full throttle a smoother passage for the air 
           past the butterfly will exist *without* the solder lump.

The downside of either soldering or fitting a valveless butterfly must be 
the over-run emissions problem (which is probably due to the inlet vacuum 
drawing oil down the inlet valve stem) plus increased carbon on the tops of 
the inlet vavles (again due to oil being drawn down the stem). 

Any thoughts on power losses due to carbon on the inlet valves? 

Regards,
Mike.


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
  • Re: those SU valve thingies, jeffreys_m_j <=