Listers:
I just had a brain fart while talking to someone about our axle
problem. I remembered that a couple of years ago an MG (sorry if I
offend anyone by using those letters) racer at the track broke an
axle, and I was surprised to see that the wheel did not part company
from the car. He was able to change the axle without removing the
outer axle bearings. Well I've just looked in the workshop manuals and
saw that there are two different axles used on the MG's. Post '67 used
a Salisbury rear axle which is just like the TR axle in theory and
operation. But, '67 and earlier used a "Banjo" axle assembly. From the
drawings it looks like the axle and hub slide in/out of the bearing,
which is retained in the tube. It looks like the brake back plate
retains the axle and hub to the axle tube. You would also have the
added advantage of being able to change the ring and pinion with the
rear axle in the car because the front of the pumpkin separates from
the axle case and tubes.
Now, my question to the list is does this not sound like a
slightly better way to retain the axle and hub assembly? It appears
that the only way you would lose a wheel would be to brake the hub
clean off the axle shaft. True or false? Has anyone tried this method
yet? Without actually touching one I can only imagine that the axle
must be close to the same track width because a "B" is not that
different in size from a TR.
Please let me know your thoughts on this idea.
Thanks, Ed Barnard
|