I knew you would get the problem solved sooner or later, Jeff. I'll bet
that it is good to know it wasn't your technique that was responsible. Way
to go, too, Joe.
> ----------
> From: Jeff McNeal[SMTP:jmcneal@ohms.com]
> Reply To: Jeff McNeal
> Sent: Monday, March 13, 2000 1:44 PM
> To: Spitfire List
> Subject: Gearbox woes - MYSTERY SOLVED
>
>
> For those who have been following my troubles with a Mk3 gearbox top that
> wouldn't mate correctly with my Mk2 gearbox, effectively locking up first
> and reverse whenever I tried to use first, Joe Curry gets the prize for
> solving this most perplexing mystery.
>
> While most of you won't have occasion to replace or swap your gearbox
> cover
> independently of your entire gearbox, here's something that the rest
> should
> know:
>
> The covers for full synchro versus non synchro gearboxes are subtley
> different. The most important difference is that the notch position of
> the
> reverse actuator on the third rail in the cover is pushed forward 1/4",
> which tucks the larger reverse gear that's used in the earlier non-synchro
> Spitfire boxes back farther into the corner -- and out of the way of first
> gear.
>
> This difference is NOT noted in any of my parts catalogs, but here's a
> telltale "marker" to look for to differentiate an earlier Mk3 non synchro
> gearbox cover from a later MkIV full-synchro box: The full synchro box has
> a
> spacer washer on the reverse rail, whereas the earlier non-synchro
> Spitfire
> reverse rails do not. That, and the difference in the notch position on
> the
> reverse actuator.
>
> THANKS TO ALL THE GREAT MINDS ON THIS LIST WHO WORKED TIRELESSLY TO GET ME
> THROUGH THIS!!!!! The "correct" Mk3 top is on the way to me now and by
> the
> end of the week, I should be able to get out of "park" and back into first
> gear!
>
> CHEERS!
>
> Jeff in San Diego
> '67 RHD Spitfire Mk3 aka "Mrs. Jones"
> http://www.ohms.com/spitfire/spitfire.shtml
>
>
>
>
|