MG Sports Cars

engine swaps and other performance upgrades, plus "factory" and Costello V8s

Go to Thread: PreviousNext
Go to: Forum ListMessage ListNew TopicLog In
Goto Page: PreviousFirst...2223242526272829303132
Current Page: 32 of 32


BlownMGB-V8
Jim Blackwood
9406 Gunpowder Rd., Florence, KY 41042
(5198 posts)

Registered:
10/23/2007 12:59PM

Main British Car:
1971 MGB Blown,Injected,Intercooled Buick 340/AA80E/JagIRS

authors avatar
Re: 340 upgrade
Posted by: BlownMGB-V8
Date: May 31, 2017 11:42AM

Looks like more slippage in the schedule. Ended up destroying the seal in the HTOB and since those are very unique and proprietary a google search on the seal number drew a blank.

SOo.... another $48 and a 3-7 day wait for another HTOB. That doesn't leave enough time for install and shakedown/tuning so the roadster will stay home this time. I'll bring it to Townsend instead. Too bad, I know a few were looking forward to the tech session. Guess we'll do Roadmaster A/C instead.

Jim


MGBV8
Carl Floyd
Kingsport, TN
(3106 posts)

Registered:
10/23/2007 11:32PM

Main British Car:
79 MGB, Buick 215

authors avatar
Re: 340 upgrade
Posted by: MGBV8
Date: May 31, 2017 02:18PM

Sorry to hear that, Jim. I know it has been a long time.


ex-tyke
Graham Creswick
Chatham, Ontario, Canada
(947 posts)

Registered:
10/25/2007 11:17AM

Main British Car:
1976 MGB Ford 302

authors avatar
Re: 340 upgrade
Posted by: ex-tyke
Date: May 31, 2017 09:10PM

Quote:
Ended up destroying the seal in the HTOB...

For such a high priced product, most HTOB's are overpriced, underperforming pieces of crap. An HTOB stopped me from going to British V8 2002 in Tennessee, so I can sense your disappointment - do yourself a favour and ditch the thing and go to an external slave cylinder.
Roadmaster will be more than suitable alternative.


rficalora
Rob Ficalora
Cypress, TX
(2305 posts)

Registered:
10/24/2007 02:46PM

Main British Car:
'76 MGB w/CB front, Sebring rear, early metal dash Ford 302

authors avatar
Re: 340 upgrade
Posted by: rficalora
Date: May 31, 2017 09:14PM

Jim - is there not time to make a bracket & use an external slave? Don't have to pull the engine for that.


BlownMGB-V8
Jim Blackwood
9406 Gunpowder Rd., Florence, KY 41042
(5198 posts)

Registered:
10/23/2007 12:59PM

Main British Car:
1971 MGB Blown,Injected,Intercooled Buick 340/AA80E/JagIRS

authors avatar
Re: 340 upgrade
Posted by: BlownMGB-V8
Date: June 01, 2017 11:16AM

Rob, it's worth thinking about. The biggest issue with using this OEM style HTOB is that you have to install and remove the T5 and bellhousing as a unit. This causes a lot of other problems, such as:

Cutting the fixed crossmember and fashioning a removable section becomes mandatory unless the engine is removed also.

Unless either the engine is positioned very far forwards or the engine mounts etc allow the engine to be greatly tilted to the rear, it is not removable due to the firewall. In most cases this will also mean unbolting the headers from the heads for transmission removal, and possibly unbolting the engine mounts. It may mean jacking up the front of the engine as well.

Access to the bellhousing/engine bolts is very difficult.

In addition, it requires careful selection of the pressure plate as it is incompatible with a high RPM bent finger diaphragm style PP. To get the same performance, a finger-weighted style such as CenterForce must be used, adding additional expense.

Then as Graham notes there is the quality. Upon removal of the seal I was able to inspect the bore and the shortcomings there are obvious. No deburring was done on the holes that lead to the bore for pressure and bleed, resulting in some very sharp edges in proximity to the seal. It looks rather clear that every time the seal bottomed in the bore these edges took a nibble out of the back outer edge of the seal, any one of which could have caused leakage.

And finally there is the fact that you cannot use this HTOB without an $80 input shaft bearing retainer which is difficult to source. Unless that is already on the transmission it is an additional expense.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now to be fair, the alternatives are not perfect. Aftermarket HTOBs also do not allow the use of a bent finger PP. They have had quality issues. They generally have no anti-rotation provision aside from the hoses. And they are ridiculously expensive.

A mechanical TOB has friction, clearance, linkage and slave issues, but it will allow the use of the bent finger PP if room can be found externally. Usually this means a "pull" type cylinder, shortening of the clutch arm, and juggling of bore sizes to get something that works and feels acceptable. However, I'm willing to consider that possibility. A cable release arm such as used in the V6 Buick application would allow a rear mounted standard cylinder.

Jim
Goto Page: PreviousFirst...2223242526272829303132
Current Page: 32 of 32


Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.