The extra thrust washers would require some machining, wouldn't
they? I'm thinking that there's no room in the bearing cap for them
(if there was, they would tend to spin out of place, just like Jeff's
rod bearing did). I appreciate everyone's concern about thrust washers
due to the catastrophic nature of their failure (I too have lost an
engine to TW dropout), but I sometimes wonder if we're being overly
paranoid with all this advanced re-engineering. It seems it would be
easier to invest ten dollars and four hours every 50,000 miles and
just replace them.
My .02 (if that).
Greg Rowe
>From: Carter Shore <clshore@yahoo.com>
>
>Jeff,
>I've only worked with the 4 and 6 cylinders used in
>Spitfires, GT6, Heralds, and such, but I've never seen
>one fitted with 4 thrust washers from the factory.
>
>Instructions for fitting 4 thrust washers are
>available on several sites. Pinning them so that they
>will not drop out when worn is also worth a look.
>
<snipped>
>
>--- Jeff Gruber <jgruber@demainsoft.com> wrote:
> > JD tells me that triumph used to put 4 thrust
> > washers in their motors and
> > for some reason (cost cutting?) they later went to
> > just two.
> >
> >
> > Since I'm taking apart motors left and right
> > (literally) I figured why not
> > put four thrust washers in, instead of two.
> >
> > Opinions?
> >
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > Jeff "Washers Are Cheaper Than Cranks" Gruber
_________________________________________________________________
/// spitfires@autox.team.net mailing list
/// To unsubscribe send a plain text message to majordomo@autox.team.net
/// with nothing in it but
///
/// unsubscribe spitfires
///
|