Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Servodyne

Pages: [1]
Twins / Re: Rear brake issue.
« on: 17 May, 2018, 08:52:42 »
I would just buy the modified pivot pads 37.4037 first.

I think that you'll find most of the slack disappears.

Twins / Re: Rear brake issue.
« on: 13 May, 2018, 22:37:34 »
In my experience with the Conical rear brake, the standard BSA pivot pads 41-6078 are not thick enough. Consequentially the brake lever has to turn past 90 deg to the brake rod rod before it begins to bite. You can fit a Triumph modified pivot pad 37.4037 which has a plate spot welded onto it to increase the effective thickness and take up the 'slack'.
I think this will sort out your problem.

Twins / Re: Cable Routing A65 OIF.
« on: 09 May, 2018, 11:10:34 »
I've had some fun with the wiring harness over the years, but I've finally got it to a stage where when I wire up my next OIF project I'll follow the same route.

When I got the Firebird it have new repro Lucas harnesses fitting with cloth braiding. Within a short period of time the braid had scuffed the chrome on my rear mudguard. Shortly after that the braid 'rotted' through and literally fell off in places. Also, the harness coming out of the headlight into the rubber grommet behind the headstock was so thick and rigid it wore some of the paint off the frame and destroyed the rubber grommet.
Whilst the bike was on a layup waiting for SRM to do their thing on my crankshaft I decided to remove the harness to see if I could improve it. Basically the wiring and connectors were in good order, so I stripped off what braiding was left and replaced it with PVC tubing, sealed at both ends with shrink tube. I also simplified the wiring around the headstock/headlight. When you remove the cloth braiding you will find wires going from the frame to the headlight and back again just adding to the bulk of the cable. When I had stripped out the wires going back and forth and sheathed the harness with PVC tube it was vastly reduced in bulk and much more compliant with steering head movement. I decided to route the one harness from the headlight into one frame grommet and the two handlebar switch cables into the other. All other connections are either under the frame or in the headlight shell.
I also replaced the cables coming from the Lucas handlebar switches with 'repair' cables off ebay. I was able to tailor the lengths to fit the bike as the originals are either too long or too short.
As I said in my previous post, it may not be the right way but it works for me.
I hope that you find this of some help.

Twins / Re: Cable Routing A65 OIF.
« on: 09 May, 2018, 10:35:45 »
I wouldn't say mine's the right way, but after much fine tuning over the years I'm fairly happy with it.

Keep the front brake cable well away from the front mudguard if you value your chrome. Have it tied using the one clip on the lower yoke. I've seen cables being clipped to the mudguard, but I think this adversely affects the sweeping run of the cable.

Speedo and tacho cables need to be tied centrally before being tied to the frame tube with a rubber tie. I've got the smaller headlight being a Firebird, so it may not be as easy a cable run from the clocks.

Twins / Re: Advance timing mark?
« on: 22 April, 2018, 19:53:18 »
Sounds really sweet Dan. You must have really good idler gear bushes in the motor.

Twins / Re: Advance timing mark?
« on: 20 April, 2018, 22:47:25 »
Hi Dan
I've been running with the Wassell ignition for over 5 years now and found it to be very reliable. You have to use the pointer on the primary cover I'm afraid; I don't really understand why you wouldn't want to as this indicates the fully advanced position of the crank.
One thing I did discover with the Wassell unit though, was that the static marks on my stator weren't very accurate. The photo shows the position of the marks when I had strobed the ignition at fully advance. In future if I need to disturb the ignition I would set it as near to the photo statically before checking it with the strobe.
Hope this helps.

Twins / Re: A65 Gearbox Camplate
« on: 16 April, 2018, 16:21:59 »
I assume the purpose of the step is simply to provide a thicker and stronger bearing surface for the selector fork rollers. What is the actual width of the slot in the end cover? I believe the later cam plates were 3/16" thick at the bearing.

The slot in the end cover is around 5mm or 3/16" which is the same as the thicker part of the stepped cam plate, so it makes you wonder why BSA bothered with the added expense of machining the step when a wider slot would do the same job!

Thanks everybody. It's now clear that I need a new cam plate to match the end cover. Now does anybody know where I can find a reverse non stepped cam plate, so the shift pattern matches my A10 and Norton?

Twins / A65 Gearbox Camplate
« on: 16 April, 2018, 11:37:24 »
Hi all. Does anybody know which is the latest type on cam plate fitting to the OIF A65?
I have the stepped cam plate, but it is too narrow for the slot in my end cover and wags about a bit. It's as if I need a none stepped cam plate or an end cover with a narrower slot.
My bike is a 1971 Firebird, so is the cam plate correct for my bike or my end cover and what was the purpose of the step in the first place?
Thanks all

Twins / Re: New Chrome Rear Mudguard Fitting. A65 OIF
« on: 31 January, 2018, 18:40:40 »
I had a poor experience recently buying a new rear for my OIF Firebird. I bought it off ebay from a well known and usually respected vendor BBB. Advertised as triple chrome and UK made I thought was bound to be very good. Unfortunately the chrome had a slight pickled finish, the sides were rippled and some of the holes were slightly out of place, but the biggest fault which killed it for me was the standard of the rolled edge at the rear and the jagged burr at the front. For the sake of 10 minutes fettling at either end before chroming, the seller lost the sale and I returned it. I cost me 10 for the return postage and I had to fight for the original postage through Ebay.
I eventually bought a good used one for 50 and had it re-chromed.

Twins / Re: BSA A10 Spitfire engine in Rickman MK3 frame
« on: 26 January, 2018, 21:46:11 »
Thanks for posting the latest. It's one I've not seen before and it seems that I've gone for the wrong colour for my tank.  :-\

Twins / Re: BSA A10 Spitfire engine in Rickman MK3 frame
« on: 26 January, 2018, 19:55:27 »
Oops wrong attachment

Twins / Re: BSA A10 Spitfire engine in Rickman MK3 frame
« on: 26 January, 2018, 19:53:57 »
There were subtle differences between West and East coasts just to confuse the issue. The attached brochure is identical to the 1963 east coast Spitfire but now includes the words Gold Star in the title. 

Twins / Re: BSA A10 Spitfire engine in Rickman MK3 frame
« on: 26 January, 2018, 17:41:13 »
Gorgeous Rickman Spitfire, there can't be many about.

A65 spitfires came as mk2, mk3 and mk4s, so I suppose the A10 version was classed as the mk1, but even so, changed quite a lot from the 57 original with Gold Star running gear, to using A10 running gear from 58 through 60 then back to the Gold star 61 to 63 where it was known as the Rocket Gold Star Spitfire Scrambler. Interestingly only the 57 had low run pipes and dual seat.

Twins / Re: Bike Height ?
« on: 24 January, 2018, 22:46:57 »
I'm not sure that the later centre stands are shorter than the 1971 models, as the parts catalogues for both gives the same part number. However, the OIF singles are definitely 3/4" shorter. The 1971 stand is 10" from the centre of the pivot hole to the edge of the stand, compared with 9 1/4" for a B25SS. Other than that, they are visually identical and a straight forward replacement. I've got one fitted to my 1971 Firebird and it's made life a hell of a lot easier getting it onto the main stand, leaving the rear wheel about 1" off the deck and giving enough clearance to remove either wheel. 
The other thing to look out for, is how much the stand goes 'over centre' when putting the bike on the stand. Some stands go so much over centre, that both wheels end up touching the ground and these are the ones that are most difficult moving the bike on and off the stand. The cause of this could be worn holes in the frame or more likely poor control of frame and/or centre stand dimensions from the factory. 
This situation is easily remedied by building up the stops on the stand with a small run of weld in order to reduce the angle that the stand goes over centre. Around 20 deg from vertical should be ample. I've done the same trick on my 1957 A10 Spitfire, so both have less chance of giving me a hernia. 

Twins / Re: A65 OIF remote oil filter.
« on: 18 January, 2018, 16:07:43 »
He's my take on the remote oil filter for the OIF A65. The filter block is a piece of aluminium I picked up from ebay hand crafted into the shape shown with a steel threaded union from a Pan European to take the HiFlo HF303 filter.
It's simply attached to the rear mudguard frame bracket bolt with an additional 1/4UNF threaded hole in the rear engine plate. The existing return line hose is cut and two banjo fittings used to connect to the filter block. The hardest part was finding a M20 x1.5 tap to tap the hole for the threaded union.

Pages: [1]