> I am looking at the
> crankcase breather pipe and it looks like a place that would let
> contaminants into the system.
I honestly don't believe that's a significant problem ... many long-lived
engines had a similar road draft tube.
> The TR4 had positive crankcase ventilation
> (might have been a TR4A). Is there any reason why you wouldn't
> want to put a
> plug in the TR3 crankcase breather pipe and put on a later valve
> cover with
> a tube connecting the valve cover to the air cleaner to keep positive
> ventilation on the crankcase? It seems like it would possibly help prevent
> oil leaks as well. What could go wrong? The factory did it eventually on
> other Triumphs.
The factory did it not to keep the engine clean, but to meet US emission
requirements. There were several problems with the various Triumph factory
systems (the TR4 was different than the TR4A)
1) They didn't draw clean air into the crankcase, so it remained full of
fumes that would eventually condense and contaminate the oil.
2) Most of them did not allow for operation with little or no manifold
vacuum ... when blow-by is highest. This leads to high crankcase pressure,
which causes oil leaks (especially with the original labyrinth rear seal).
3) Some of them lacked adequate oil separators, with the result that oil
mist could be carried out of the crankcase and into the intake manifold ...
blue smoke !
Randall
|