Alan
If we really want to get a heated discussion going then perhaps we
should compare Austin with BMC or putting it another way Austin-Healeys
having most Austin major units replaced with Morris versions.
Just to stir things up how about my claim that the early BN1 was the
only true Austin-Healey. The rest should have been called BMC-Healey.
Just kidding
All the best
>Having both an early BN1 and a BJ8 has taught me a few
>things about Healey manufacturing quality.
>
>Although the BJ8 by far is a more complete car w/ disk
>brakes, roll up windows and a good sealing hood....
>the BN1 is built to a much higher quality standard, no
>question. Every bolt, nut and fixture on the BN1
>seems to have been made with more care, attention to
>detail & quality. Probably why your BN2 drums are
>better made than most BJ8 drums.
>
>Probably if you interpolate from this a straight line
>of progressive build quality, you'll probably
>understand why they stopped making real MGs and
>Triumphs around 1980.
>
>It's probably a good thing that Donald Healey stopped
>making the Big Healey in '67... it never lost its
>luster quite like Triumph did. I guess that's because
>the car carried Donald's name... and he cared about
>his legacy!
>
>Cheers,
>
>Alan
>
>'53 BN1 '64 BJ8
>
>--- Dave & Marlene <rusd@velocitus.net> wrote:
>> I just checked out the front brake drums on my BN2.
>> Set a drum up in my
>> lathe & measured with a dial indicator. After
>> chucking on the center
>> hole, & zeroing there, measured the total indicated
>> runout (tir) at the
>> flange inner surface & the inside shoe surface at
>> .008". The outside
>> drum surface measured the same runout. Drum wall
>> thickness varied from
>> .300" to .296". I think .004" off center in the
>> casting is pretty good
>> for 48 year old drums. Don't know why the runout was
>> between the center
>> hole & the rest of the drum. But then I don't know
>> the machining
>> sequence that was used. The other front drum was
>> nearly as good with
>> .009" tir. No taper (bellmouth) & no egg shape as
>> measured with an
>> inside micrometer. Didn't bother to check the rear
>> drums. Drum id's were
>> 11.005". Don't know if this is standard. Have never
>> had any vibration
>> problems, & have never checked balance. Was just
>> curious. I think this
>> proves that the factory could get it pretty close,
>> at least in 1956.
>> Maybe they got sloppy later on. Or maybe just lucky
>> sometimes.
>>
>> I would be interested in what others find if they
>> try the same measurements.
>>
>> Dave Russell
>> BN2
>
--
John Harper
|