You do not know what dust or other may have collected in it. You could leave the cam with gears in place when you split the cases, blow some brake cleaner into the oil holes then oil or assembly lube when you put it back together. If the ball check valves in the pump are gummed up you will not have oil pressure or no return or both.
Even at 8K miles the sludge trap in the crank should be cleaned. You do not know if they ever changed oil or if they used non-detergent oil. You also have to clean out the frame backbone which serves as the oil tank.

 

Hi Loz,
Everything rubber in the engine is likely to be perished, any lubricant in the engine when it stopped is likely to have congealed blocking the oilways. Condensation in the bearings is likely to have eaten into the hardened finish.
If you are going to take it apart do it properl, any half arsed attempt is almost guaranteed to end in tears.
If you want to have a reliable non leaking bike then rebuild it properly.
The frames are pretty tough on these machines, but testing for straightness would be prudent.

regards
Peg.

 

Be very aware that a bike with damage to the primary and those two dome nuts, is likely to have bent stator bolts. This can also have pushed the rotor and damaged the crankshaft end. I have seen this on a T120r bought on ebay as a crashed bike. Eventually the new owner gave up rebuilding it as so many unseen damage showed up. Just look and measure very carefully. It will be very obvious if the stator posts are bent

 

Thanks for replies , ok i am easily convinced , it looks such a mint engine it would be foolish to take any chance of damage . There was plenty of sludge ( and the dipstick ) at bottom of sump and piston rings were gummed up. I was guessing about damage to primary case as the one fitted was loose but nothing inside has been touched so thinking a damaged one changed for a good one for selling .
Frame does have a bit of damage on right down tube , steering stop must have been knocked off as it has worst repair ive ever seen and steering stem looks a couple degrees off vertical so its going to a frame straightening place .

The original triumph casing sealer looks a bit like brown varnish , any reccomendations for sealer to use today , i have used ' 3 bond ' for other crank cases

 

, i have used ' 3 bond ' for other crank cases

👍🏻

 

This weekend i managed to get the engine stripped down , was far easier than i imagined and now have crank and casings sat on bench . Still need to pull bearing off crank to get to sludge trap . Plenty of evidence that its the first time its been apart and everything looks pretty mint .
So I spent all yesterday evening reading forum posts , started off looking at info about roller bearings and got side tracked by cams and cam timing and followers . I am now thinking that as its stripped i might as well spend about 300 quid on a roller bearing , 650 cams and a pair of R followers , my biggest worry is the running in of the cams on a just rebuilt engine that i have never run before .
The T100 i had 40 years ago was a tired old 5TA when i got it , after it threw a rod i got a set of T100 cases , new cams , rods and a mains bush ( from Sids place in radcliffe ) , threw everything together and hey presto a really good bike , no one mentioned running in - sometimes ignorance is bliss !
Any thoughts appreciated , is cam lube more of a grease , would assembly oil do instead , Thanks Loz

 

Dunno what forums you’ve been reading on cams! Most T140’s had R followers anyway on the exhaust, the inlet cams should NEVER be used with R followers, far too severe. Yes, a different exhaust cam can give a good performance boost, but even re-timing the standard cams to around 100 degrees inlet lobe centre and 105 degrees exhaust will liberate quite a bit of power. You would need to fit the roller timing side bearing, as the extra power will kill the standard bearing.

 

According to parts diagrams 61 - 68 T120 650's used R followers with 3134 inlet cam and the 8801 followers that i have already as standard on the 9989 exhaust cam . This seems to be backed up by some of the posts i read . Would i be ok with the 71.7008 followers i already have on inlets ?

 

On another quick subect , anyone recognise thease exhaust stubs , all the ones i have seen for sale appear to be steel with a couple of holes in to aid removal . Thease are aluminium , no holes , 42mm diameter , and a funny bit of metal sticking out the side of the right one . I presume they are screw in , stuck so far but not tried any heay duty grips ( which will probably destroy them ) Are they correct size for push over exhausts ?

 

Looking at the photo and the 'shim', I'd say they are press fit 'push in' adaptors. They would need heat and leverage to get them out, it won't be easy. The wall thickness also reduces ID and they would likely be very restrictive, replace with commercially available units. I'd even consider getting the head tapped and custom steel units installed. A good machinist shop would be your best bet.
Is the other side the same?

 

Thanks , yes other side same minus 'shim' , are the ports threaded as standard ? I wont worry about damaging them then , see what ive got when they are out

 

Hi Loz(?),

As standard, T140's had what are known colloquially as "push in pipes" - the exhaust ports are just 'oles in the head, the combination of main exhaust pipes at an angle to one another and a cross-over pipe clamped to stubs on the main pipes, plus the brackets lower down between the main pipes and each end of a front engine mounting bolt was supposed to hold it all together ...

In practice, a triumph (sorry) of hope over reality plus, if a pipe works loose inside the exhaust port, vibration rattling the pipe around tends to wear the port out-of-round. So there are various aftermarket remedies for fitting spigots into the exhaust posts, that the ends of earlier "push over pipes" ... errr ... push over, to be clamped with finned exhaust clamps.

The best are the earlier steel spigots, the exhaust ports tapped to take these spigots' thread. However, the best is also the most expensive so, as T140's have only recently ceased to be the bodgers' favourite Triumph, expect to find various cheaper folk remedies as in your photo. ...

Hth.

Regards,

 

That does look a bodge. Somewhere like Seagar Engineering Seager Engineering could fix it. I mention them as they repaired the exhaust ports on my T140, which according to them was one of the worst heads they'd seen. They machined out the ruined ports on mine, built them up with weld & then machined to size. That was followed by fitting threaded inserts & their custom stubs to suit.

 

You can, of course, use a 650 E3134 cam and R followers for the inlet, but the standard 71-7016 T140 (Spitfire type) cam used wth the 71-7008 (3/4" standard profile) followers are a more modern profile. The standard profile followers are not great from a performance point of view with the E3134 form cams.
If you have a 70-9899 exhaust cam in there, it is not standard T140, but late 650, a nitrided E3134 cam. The 70-8801 are T140 exhaust followers and are R 1 1/8" radius anyway, though the standard T140 71-7017 cam is a very low lift and dwell cam, the only saving grace being that it is a ramp type cam, so quieter.
For high performance, the special 71-7017R cam, which is the T140 Spitfire inlet profile on an exhaust shaft used with 3/4" radius followers is the way to go, it gives the same overall cam performance as the late 650 Thruxton production race setup.
More important than the camshaft combination you use is degreeing the cams, even the standard T140 setup will be much better timed at 100 degree inlet lobe centre and 105 degree exhaust instead of the circa 94/100 of the standard engine.
Take a look at my spiel on Vintage Techical Tricks and Tips HERE and the (modified by me) list of cams and timings attached.
The LSR boys use slightly different lobe centres again, but I assume you're not going for a land speed record.
Possibly best to PM me if you want chapter and verse on this stuff.
PS The exhaust stub stuff that others have replied to is dead right, I have a head (cylinder, that is) on the shelf with just those awful press-in alloy stubs.

 

Hi Mick , wow thanks for all the info , unfortunately i would probably need to do an engineering degree to understand most of it . What i have is a bog standard 1973 T140 and after reading many posts i am led to belive its a bit de-tuned due to bearing eating capability . I am not after a race bike for high speed thrashing but any extra performance or grunt at lower revs is always welcome. It would appear that i have now gone feet first into something i dont really understand as i have just ordered 2 Harris cams , an E3134 and an E9989 and a roller bearing . I havent done anything about the followers yet but parts lists suggest i should already have correct ones for the 9989 exhaust cam. Any opinions on what my best course of action should be now, fit the new cams or not ?

 

If you can return the E3134, I would do it, unless your original camshaft is worn, unlikely, as these are nitrided.
The cam followers you have for the exhaust will be fine whichever of the cams you now have are used, but if you did fit the E3134 inlet, you would need to use 70-3059R followers (E3059R).
Triumph did indeed "detune" to save the timing side bearing, but there may have been emission issues as well, their engineers were not fools.
Even with the standard cams, more power can be "liberated" by re-timing. If you set the inlet cam to use the "A" mark and keyway, and the exhaust to use the "B" mark (the opposite of standard). you should get close to 100 lobe centre inlet and 105 lobe centre exhaust. This should work with a 9989 cam as well, but I do like to check with a degree disk - it really isn't that difficult!
PS where are you, I'm in S. Bucks.

 

Hi Loz, A '73 will need a C3 clearance Timing side roller main. The same clearance the 60-4167 ball was.

When Triumph installed the TS roller 60-7362 at factory the dimeter of crank journal was reduced to accommodate CN clearance bearing.

You may be able to force crank into the roller, but unless it drops in & pulls out freely, it will lack oil clearance & have reduced service life per NSK engineering pages. I have a brand new CN in my tool box that didn't have enough clearance. Four earlier T140 type cranks so far I've been involved with have all needed C3 roller.
Don

 

Thanks Mick , the posts i was reading suggested that whilst the 9989 cam liberated more power the 3143 moved it lower down the rev range . Some people were saying wow what a difference but maybe that was down to cam timing? Given that i will be attemting to do the cam timing propery whatever cams i fit how much difference would the new cams be likely to make? Someone racing might be thrilled with a 1or2% increase in power , for me its not worth the bother unless its quite a lot more
If i keep my standard inlet cam then no followers to buy , If I keep the standard exhaust as well then no running in of the new cam so some positives . My thoughts were that as the engine is stripped down anyway I might as well do any changes now. P.S. I am in W Yorkshire so sadly not close enough to pop round !

 

Just re-timing what you have should give a useful increase in torque and maximum power. There will be some trade-off over and above the re-timed standard setup using the 9989 exaust or the 71-7017R, not necessarily to everyones taste. I do a lot of cafe racer (and the odd race) engines, where ultimate performance is (supposedly) required, so am biased.
On the timing side bearing front, Don had a definitely "big" shaft diameter, the supposed Triumph spec. has a maximum diameter of 30.00mm, which should not be that tight to the bearing (the minimum is 29.99mm). If you are within those measurements, the CN will work - and not if not!

 

Hi Don , thanks for the post about bearings , thats another surprise problem . I have seen C3 and CN bearings for drive side , i presume CN are the standard ones so are C3 for high speed or racing ? So for timing side , given the clearence is within the bearing are you saying that the tight fit on crank is expanding the inner race to tighten it up . I havent seen any C3 timing bearings for sale but then i wasnt looking

 

Hi,

presume CN are the standard ones so are C3 for high speed or racing ?

'Fraid you presume entirely wrong - previously posted in NEED HELP FINDING REPLACEMENT MAIN BEARING 1970 T120R :-
CN, C3, etc. refers to the bearing's internal clearance before fitting:-

. after fitting, all bearings should end up with the internal clearance within a particular range, that takes account of heating in use, etc.;

. if fitting on the shaft expands the bearing's inner race ("interference fit" because the bearing's ID is some thousandths of an inch smaller than the shaft's OD), that'll reduce the bearing's internal clearance;

. similarly, if fitting in the crankcase contracts the bearing's outer race (again, "interference fit" because the bearing's OD is some thousandths of an inch larger than the case bearing housing's ID), that'll reduce the bearing's internal clearance;

. if either of the above will reduce the bearing's internal after-fit clearance below the aforementioned "particular range", you start with a bearing with a larger-than-desirable internal clearance before fitting (e.g. C3), the fitting reduces the internal clearance, you (should) end up with the fitted bearing having internal clearance within the desirable range.

For clarity, CN starts with internal clearance within the desirable range, so fitting it shouldn't either expand the bearing's inner race or contract its outer race:-

When Triumph installed the TS roller 60-7362 at factory the dimeter of crank journal was reduced to accommodate CN clearance bearing.

Hth.

Regards,

 

Thanks Stuart , so basically bearings are a bit stretchy . That then begs the question of why are CN and C3 bearings available for drive side if cranks and casings are all machined to same size on drive side , i was thinking use and application was involved .
Re checked sellers ad , it says -
*** superblend 3 piece bearing for timing side crank T140 replaces the ball bearing ,
STD fitment on all T140 models from about 1980.
Will also fit 1972 T120 with metric timing side (6306)

Do you think i should have a go trying to bash it on or send it back and try to find a C3 ?

 

if cranks and casings are all machined to same size on drive side

🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂 by the mid 60’s Triumph was running on worn out machinery from the 1930’s, no two cranks/casing came out the same Size.

When the factory closed in 1983, they were still using the same heavy press that was rescued and welded back together after being bombed on 14th Nov 1940.in the Coventry factory,

The timing side is hard to get within an acceptable band, but the drive side is a nightmare.
The late crankcases so have an advantage over the earlier cases, more on this later.

It is very difficult to adjust the fit of the bearing case in the crankcase recess accuratel, without having access to equipment outside that is usually too expensive for home repairs, it is usually a machine shop job. But some adjustment to the inner race fit on the crankshaft can be easily achieved using a lathe. Small adjustments can be made using emery cloth and spinning the crankshaft in a lathe, and using the emery cloth to carefully reduce the inner bearing land, plenty of care, patience and frequent trial and error pays off.
The golden rule ids metal is easy to remove, but hard to put back. It’s also easy to make things oval, making them round (and concenric) is hard.

In the late 70’s Brian Jones and the Co-operative finally got a a crankcase bearing rolling machine, they were then able to produce bearing recesses accurately rolled round to the correct size. Making the late crankcases easier to work with.

My worry is always on the timing side, where the bearing outer case has a back face one side and an open face on the other, it makes me worry that one side resists compression resiliently and the other does not. My fear that a tight crankcase will produce a non-parallel bearing surface.

I think I like to run the bearings slightly tighter than others, I am happy that the bearings will resist straight pressure on assembly but will instantly drop into place with a half turn of the crank. As the engine heats up, the crankshaft and bearing inner should expand at a similar rate, but the outer steel race should not expand as fast as the aluminium so ease the pressure off the bearing, increasing internal clearance.
I don’t know for sure if this is correct- but it seems to Serve me OK.

regards
Peg

 

Hi Loz, That's exactly what I mean, the inner race OD expands from the press fit on crank. This can easily be measured with a micrometer. Measure on bench, then drive race on crank, you'll see it expand. Mine expanded .0007". That's the maximum allowed per NSK no matter the clearance factor. Factory had a crank journal tolerance for the main journals. This changed for the roller bearing to smaller diameter. We're only talking about less than .001". I'm sure case bore for outer race had tolerance as well. Supposedly Triumph kept this bore fairly consistent.

The outer race will indeed reduce in diameter after case cools to room temp & crank with fitted race is same temp. You can very readily feel the clearance is reduced when fitting crank into the fitted race. C3 on bench is as loose as a goose. I'd never expected the clearance to change this much. But it does & all makes sense & is exactly what the engineering pages said it would do.

The clearance difference on average is not quite .0005" larger for the C3. Even clearance of .0001" cold will allow crank to lift out freely. Will be harder to work in as it must align rollers as you go in. It's the pull out that will let you know if too tight.

On my CN mistake I could work in the crank. Not easy, but turning & pushing down hard it went. Spun very freely. The Other end of crank had zero wobble. I knew it was too tight. The opposite end of crank should have a little wiggle from the tiny normal oil clearance rollers need.
Crank was impossible to pull out by hand no matter how hard I pulled. I had to drive it out with hammer & brass tube.

Don't forget to drop side washer into case before dropping in bearing. It won't fit through the hole from outside.

Measuring various new bearing OD they are pretty accurately ground. Between .0001 & .00015". I don't own bore gauge. Plus is must be very accurate. Using snap gauges the ID of inner race is about the same accuracy so far as I could estimate. Even though on the engineering pages the CN & C3 clearance tolerance is basically side to side, meaning a Loose CN is kissing clearance of tight C3. However in real life my experience is they are true to clearance. So I don't think we need to worry about the tolerances of the bearings so long as they are high quality, they seem to be on spec.

After you fit crank & torque pinion, would you please measure crank end play & state bearing brand. I'm surveying end play of the different bearings. Both my NSK had about .010" end play. The factory installed roller of the one example I personally measured was about .007" end play. On member here check the end play of the Romania made URB roller. It was about .003". Factory spec is .003-.017" end play. Don't think the ball bearing doesn't have end play. Feels like zero, but dial indicator shows they have .003-.005" end play when new. The roller you can easily feel any end play. .010" feels huge. So you need to actually measure it not guesstimate.
Don

 

Hi Peg, The half turn of crank is lining up the rollers in my experience. I must do that even with C3.

The real test is lifting out crank. If it pulls out freely you're not too tight.

Polishing crank to fit CN is ok, but for most owners, using a C3 is a simpler operation with no risk of taking off too much metal.
Don

 

Thanks all , i think i have finally got my head around all this . I pulled the old 8 ball timing side bearing off the crank today , reasonably tight fit , and it is a C3 with the 3 little circles on it so i guess its definately a C3 required and makes sense to get a new roller bearing . Have found a supplier with several to choose from so will get the high quality one . My only measuring equipment is a well used 25 year old vernier but i measured the shaft at 30.04 ( might be 30.02 ! ) definately a tad over 30.
Mick I think you have convinced me to send the cams back and stick with standard . Once again thanks to all you propper engineers , your knowlage and experience is a fantastic help , Loz

 

Hi Loz, Since you had the C3 ball & it was snug on crank, get a C3 roller. No real reason to measure this. If your crank pulled out of the TS bearing easily after splitting case, we'd think about calculating for CN. You need an accurate 1-2" micrometer & standard to calibrate it to measure crank. We really do need to carefully split hairs if calculating bearing clearance.

Drive inner race onto crank using a correct size tube. You can heat it if you want, but it will drive on fine cold. Then heat case in oven to 165C. I find cooler than 165C I find it hard to get outer race to drop in by gravity. Again, put the washer in case first & center it by eye. Drop outer race in. My feeling/experience is T140 case tends to fit outer race a bit tighter than earlier 650.

Heating case is really quite easy if it will fit in your kitchen oven. Clean it well & no a problem.

If you are interested I have videos of entire procedure. Send me a PM & I'll contact you via PM.
Don