I am having an argument with the boys at Moss. I got a rear tranny
seal for my '58 MGA (chassis 46726, engine 15GBUH-37044, tranny
#M-C6831) according to the spec in their catalog. Part #121-000 is
prescribed for "1500 from chassis 20753" and is described as
"Thick-steel/rubber/felt (external)". The part is about an inch
thick, has a leather inner seal and a felt outer washer. The part off
the tranny is about half an inch thick, has a rubber inner seal and a
leather outer washer. The guy at Moss insisted that their catalog was
absolutely 100% correct, and that I probably had an earlier vintage
tranny. Maybe so, but it was glued in so hard that if it was swapped,
it was swapped about a century ago....
When one checks "The Original MGA", one finds that there were no fewer
than 5 rear seals for 1500 trannys. Without going into details, seal
#4 (synthetic rubber, leather washer") at least qualitatively
describes what I found in the car (no felt) and is of the right
vintage (July 57 thru Aug 58). Clausager does not address "thick"
or "thin".
Moss specifies "Thin, steel/rubber" for earlier models, and it is
less expensive than the thick seal. Vicky Brit does not describe
their seals, but it is telling that the one for earlier cars is more
expensive (thick?) than the one for later cars (thin?). The
illustration in their catalog supports that guess.
Bottom line is that I believe that later cars should use the "thin"
(about half inch thick) as opposed to "thick" (about one inch thick)
seal. There just ain't room for the thick seal. Any netlore on
this issue?
A. B. "How's that for an obscure question" Bonds
|