Hi Ade,
This is what happens when you start mixing years on a motorcycle
Hah! You should try mixing not only years but countries ... (e.g. Japanese engine in British cycle parts :whistle). Fwiw, the system I adopted long ago is: if it's even vaguely attached to the engine (e.g. electrics, breathers, etc.), it's engine, look it up in the parts book specified by the engine; only if it can't be engine is it then cycle parts, look it up in the parts book specified by the frame. If nothing else, I find it saves time agonising when the part from either donor bike would fit and do the job.
Fwiw, if I then rock up at a dealer armed with part numbers and descriptions from the parts book(s), the fact of simply collecting them stops many mistakes when alternatives are presented.
I see that the coupler is sold in 2 different shapes with the same part code! one classed as early and one as late
Strange assumption ... and wrong. Actually, you've been gotcha'd by several things at the same time:-
. Your primary problem is whoever (you?) looked up the parts you have looked in wrong parts book - they (you?) looked in the
'70 650 parts book, not the '66 or even the '69 book.
. Parts books are not always correct. They're a freebie by the manufacturer to the dealer so they're produced as cheaply (particularly in time) as possible. Triumph parts books were produced without the benefit of computers to do the boring jobs, proof-reading is both boring and costly in time so things went out that shouldn't have, and are still out. Also, while not the problem here, another to bear in mind is they were printed by 'hot-metal' printing, the most expensive part of which were the plates to print pictures; so Triumph reused the pictures as much as possible, even if superseded parts weren't always exactly as they appeared in the picture.
. Unfortunately, specifically the '70 650 parts book has a specific mistake with the breather parts - on the "OIL TANK" pages (56/57), the new breather parts (39-47) have been drawn and listed but the old breather parts (16-19, 36 - the only ones to appear in the '69 or '66 books) weren't deleted. :bluduh
. Nevertheless, whoever looked up the parts then had a brain-fart, the breather parts have been mixed up - you've been sold the "coupler" from the "early" breathers arrangement (17 E5370) but the D-section tube from the later arrangement (43 F11614); the "late" "coupler" (41 F11610) is drawn/listed beside the D-section tube.
arn
My D shaped pipe was purchased from a reputable classic dealer
TMS? Irrespective, not one but a whole collection of mistakes have been made. The breather change wasn't a minor tinkering with a couple of pipes and a clamp, it was a major change and any "reputable dealer" parts person assembling your collection of parts in one place should've noticed. The only way a good Triumph parts person wouldn't have known is if you've collected different bits from different places?
I'll have a play this afternoon and try to get a good position for my late type.
With respect, you won't. Apart from possibly the oil tank breather hose, none of the "late" parts fit on your bike - the "late" crankcase vent hose is a much larger ID than the one that fits on your bike's engine spigot, attempting to bodge it will just give the chain something to chew on; even if your bike has the mudguard holes for the D-section hose clips, the "late" "coupler" (F11610) cannot be connected to an 'early' crankcase vent hose.
If you bought from TMS, why not simply take the incorrect parts back and get the correct ones?
Otoh, if you didn't buy the incorrect parts from TMS, why not post them back to the "reputable classic dealer" and buy the correct bits from TMS? You've complained you have to modify parts to fit; why would you spend even more time bodging incorrect parts to 'fit'?
As the saying goes, "If you don't have time to do the job properly now, how will you find the time to fix it later?"
I found that most things I purchased new needed to be modified to fit properly
Fact of life of not only owning but running something around half-a-century old, where the major trademark owners care most about their royalty payments arriving on time and bugger-all about the quality of the parts being supplied under their trademark. Otoh, at least people can still make a living making and selling these parts - try finding bits for a Britbike the same age as your Triumph, but that isn't a Triumph. :FlyingPig
why are cables always to long?
If both outer and inner are the same "too long", one of the commonest reasons is you've been sold cables for US-market handlebars but your bike has narrower and lower 'UK & General Export' 'bars? Fwiw, I always use the longer cables but, on a bike with lower-'n'-narrower 'bars, I route the cables around the front of the frame to the 'other' side before routing under the tank. Changing 'bars is a lot quicker when the only cable change is a different route. :thumb
If inner or outer is "too long" but the other isn't, could be the cable is correct but it does or doesn't pass through parts it should - a common one is additional/missing adjusters on throttle cables; a recent one was a p.o. had used 500 clutch cable parts - including the cable - on a 650; when the current owner bought the correct cable, it wouldn't fit 'til he bought the other parts it was designed to pass through.
Otoh, all the cable makers do screw up on a regular basis; one of the regular mistakes I've found from, say, Venhill, for years, is they allow different staff to measure inner-vs.-outer lengths differently ... :Not again
Many long-time owners of these heaps have assembled collections of tools that would've been in dealers' workshops 'back in the day' - in the case of cables, solder pot, 'bird-caging' tool, etc. so they can make cables that fit straight away from the separate components they bought.
Hth.
Regards,