spitfires
[Top] [All Lists]

RE: TR rubber seals question

To: "'Dave Willner'" <dwillner@icontech.com>, <spitfires@autox.team.net>,
Subject: RE: TR rubber seals question
From: "Craig Smith" <csmith1@awcwire.com>
Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 08:55:10 -0500
Here we go again!

Let me start with this.
I have been using DOT 5 in my 71 Spit for over three years, I haven't added
fluid or rebuilt ANYTHING.
DOT 5 is silicone, it will not eat paint, the boiling point for silicone is
much higher than DOT 3 and 4, it COST MORE.
You will need to do a full cleaning of all lines and cylinders.
You will be very happy with the conversion once it's done.

-----Original Message-----
From: spitfires-owner@autox.team.net [mailto:spitfires-owner@autox.team.net]
On Behalf Of Dave Willner
Sent: Tuesday, January 28, 2003 8:48 AM
To: spitfires@autox.team.net; triumphs@autox.team.net
Subject: TR rubber seals question

When I purchased my Spitfire this past October I changed all the fluids and
rebuilt the MCs and the clutch slave unit. The manuals, caps, spec sheets,
etc. all say to use DOT 3.  The majority (if not all) listers/owners say use
DOT 4 (which I did) because of the "melting" affect DOT 3 has on the natural
rubber seals Triumph used.

Over the years I've never rebuilt any hydraulic components on my 3A, except
a
leaky wheel cylinder about 10 years ago. Occasionally I have topped off the
reservoir with fluid, I'm sure I've used DOT 3 for many years with no
adverse
(noticeable) affects. It's not a daily driver, maybe 2K a year.

Were there changes along the way in the rubber used in the earlier models,
or
was all the rubber used over the years "natural," and why? Is DOT 3 in any
year/model an accident waiting to happen? TIA

///  spitfires@autox.team.net mailing list
///  or try  http://www.team.net/cgi-bin/majorcool
///  Archives at http://www.team.net/archive


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>