Rear wheel speedo drive

[Spaceman]

I'd have to measure one up but the end cover with slots for the speedo drive looks ok.

It would be interesting to know the following dimensions:

1. Inner spacer length (between bearing and speedo drive)

2. Outer spacer length

3. Swinging arm width (inside dimension between spindle brackets)

The inner spindle length looks to be much less than the figures I quoted for a A65 and B44?

[chrisx1]

It's 7 7/8" between swingarm

[Ian C]

Swinging arm width about same as my NOS one. As I stated previously, yours looks to be correct for A65 but modified for some bizarre reason to include the extra adjuster.  You earlier mentioned spacers being in wrong position?  The picture I posted is of the spacers in the correct position i.e. stepped one goes inside the speedo drive with smaller diameter towards hub. The fact that your speedo drive is seized may not be helping matters.

[Spaceman]

It's 7 7/8" between swingarm

That width is almost 1/2" greater than the figure from the A65 workshop manual. Again, it would be useful to know what the inner and outer spacer (including large nut) lengths are so we can judge whether or not the dimensions are ok. The speedo drive needs to be free to move. If it is seized then that in itself might cause it to rotate with the wheel? If necessary, the dust cover and felt washer can be prised off to allow the speedo drive innards to be cleaned out and then re-greased.

[Ian C]

It's 7 7/8" between swingarm

That width is almost 1/2" greater than the figure from the A65 workshop manual.

Which manual are you refering to? For pre-OIF A65 the dimension is 7 25/32" (7.7812") which equates to approx 197.6mm. Was the dimension smaller for the earlier gearbox drive for speedo bikes?

[Ian C]

The picture I posted is of the spacers in the correct position i.e. stepped one goes inside the speedo drive with smaller diameter towards hub.

Hands up on my part.. I should have written 'with LARGER diameter towards hub'.. Apologies for this earlier typo..

[Spaceman]

Despite having a maths degree, I can't seem to convert 25/32" into the approximate number of 1/8". As said, it's ~6/8" and not 3/8"!

[chrisx1]

I have freed up the drive and greased it as best I could. I have reassembled it as best I can. I'm using the incorrect rear adjusters as they seem to work better than the A65 ones. Haven't ridden it yet as my lovely wife has found other jobs for me to do in the garden.😂

[Allan G]

Hi Chris,

I would say the swing arm spindle is definitely not A65. However...

The early QD swing arm spindles have a smaller thread than the later ones, in addition, the short spindle that goes through the hub is matched to the spindle and the OD Part of that short spindle is different between early and late models.

Could you remind me what year your A65 is?

If it's pre 67 and has the steel brake plate fitted then you could possibly get away with just buying the long spindle - I don't know the difference in thread size so would ere on the side of caution and buy both parts. However if it has an aluminium brake plate then the short spindle will definitely be B series as mentioned and to expand on the first paragraph, A65 with aluminium brake plate will have the fatter short spindle and there would be no reduction to the OD on the long spindle down to the thread. (The early QD A65 setup does reduce like yours)

I changed my 68 setup to the early type as I wanted to go to a 42t drum, it meant changing both spindles, brake plate, drum bearings, brake drum.

The good news was the OD on both shafts where it passes through the main hub bearings is identical for A65 (I assume for cost reasons the B series would be too?) so no change was needed by me
On the wheel itself.

Your swing arm looks typical pre oif QD type for an A65, but someone has got busy with the angle grinder and tried to improve on the adjustment setup....

Or they just had a load of bits in the garage and performed Frankensteins monster to make a
Bike up without spending much money...

[chrisx1]

Image