Charles A Harris wrote:
>
> Does it not occur to those of you with 4/4s that air filters, bumpers,
> tops and speedometers are rather effeminate ? No air filter was fitted
> to Matilda when I bought her in 65. If the Lord would have not wanted
> you to re-build your engine every once in a while He would have fitted
> one.
> Chuck Harris
> 60 4/4 RHD (Emily)
> 66 4/4 (Matilda)
>
> On Mon, 8 Sep 1997 11:00:05 -0900 (PDT) "Robert K. Alexander"
> <ralex@unm.edu> writes:
> >Thanks, Tom. John Blair was responsible for the panty-hose suggestion
> >in
> >response to my original query. I'm now looking at my wife's inventory
> >with a whole new perspective!
> >
> >What I'm concerned with, as you must be too, is the filtering
> >capacities of
> >these garments, especially in the dusty Southwest. Going to have to
> >dig out
> >my old pocket comparator and measure (in microns?) the mesh size.
> >Maybe a
> >trip to Dillard's lingerie department for some comparative data
> >gathering
> >is in order. Definitly some room for original research here (John, if
> >your
> >listening, how about a new tech article?).
> >
> >The Morgan in question is a '67+4 with those long TR4 manifold tubes
> >which
> >leaves even less room (in fact, on this specimen the forward dashpot
> >is
> >rubbing on the bonnet). Apparently switching to the shorter TR3
> >manifold
> >defeats the "ram" effect on the air flow and drops the hp. Although
> >this
> >might be worth it here for cleanliness, I doubt that even this would
> >accomodate much of a filter. Perhaps just not driving on windy days or
> >dirt
> >roads is the answer.
> >
> >Bob Alexander
> >Dept. of Pantyhose Research
> >University of New Mexico - Valencia Campus
> >
> >On Sun, 7 Sep 1997 GOTom@aol.com wrote:
> >
> >> Date: Sun, 7 Sep 1997 23:54:38 -0400 (EDT)
> >> From: GOTom@aol.com
> >> To: ralex@unm.edu
> >> Subject: Re: air filters
> >>
> >> In a message dated 97-09-06 09:45:12 EDT, you write:
> >>
> >> << Sorry about that last message - switched subjects in mid-stream.
> >Was
> >> also going to ask if anyone had any kind of solution to putting air
> >
> >> filters on a TR4+4? There is nearly zero space on the front carb,
> >but I
> >> hate to put a scoop on that beautiful bonnet. What we need is some
> >kind
> >> of magic membrane that flows air, filters dust, and is very thin!
> >>>
> >>
> >> Bob, someone not long a go mentioned panty hose as a quick fix.
> >Haven't
> >> tried it yet but sounds like a reasonable temporary effort. The
> >below is a
> >> copy (bless AOL''s automatic save messages) of an alternate fix I
> >recently
> >> saw on an MG.
> >>
> >> <<I don't know much about webbers however I saw a unique alternation
> >on a 53
> >> MG to accomodate larger carbs with air cleaners. Instead of doing a
> >front
> >> facing scoop, a cut was made about an inch below the bottom of the
> >first 5
> >> lovers (This bonnet is similar to early 50's Morgan and the front
> >carb's air
> >> cleaner hits the bonnett about the same place as it would on a
> >Morgan). This
> >> flap was bent outward (at the lover closest to the firewall) enough
> >for the
> >> lovered flap to clear the carb & air cleaner while leaving the front
> >part as
> >> the pivoit point. This formed a triangle at the bottom of the flap
> >which
> >> was fitted with a wedge of sheet metal (and molded into place) to
> >support the
> >> bottom of the flap. The results were a lovered flap that, at a
> >distance, was
> >> dificult to detect any modification. This may not work on all
> >Morg's (The
> >> older models with the streighter sides are probably better suited
> >for this
> >> modification) but if it may be worth consideration if one wants to
> >minimize
> >> distorations to the hood.>>
> >>
> >> Tom Gainer
> >> 53 Flat Rad
> >>
> >PS: the MG idea sounds interesting. Are you going to do it? RA
> >Chuck-I dunno; seems to me that any 2-passenger vehicle with more than 2
wheels is pretty decadent!
-Jeff Smith
1968 4/4 1600
|