As you say, the Ferguson engine was an adaption of the the Vanguard engine.
Ferguson may have specified a lip seal change on the old rope seal which was
already in production for the Triumph line. The question is why didn't they
incorporate the change into the motor car line? Inertia, probably.
Dave Massey
-----Original Message-----
From: Jim Wallace <grandfatherjim@gmail.com>
I have rebuilt 3 Ferguson tractors, 1950-1952 models, which were
manufactured by the Standard Motor Company. I believe this motor was an
adaptation of the engine from the Standard Vanguard but my memory could be
off on that.
Anyway, the crank is the same as on the TR2/3, except - it has the more
"modern" contact-type, rear oil seal. I wonder why, when they further
adapted it for the TR, they went to a scroll?
They built a lot more of those tractors than they ever did the 4 cylinder
TRs (about 570,000) so it's not like they didn't have experience.
The tractor does top out at about 1,800 rpm; maybe that's a factor. The
tractor factor?
Jim
=========
From: "Randall" <TR3driver@ca.rr.com>
Subject: Re: [TR] When to rebuild
> The moral of the story is there are two parts to the sealing
> issue, the seal
> and the surface the seal contacts. Both are important.
Except of course for the original TR2-4A rear main seal; which was a
non-contact design. Lots of folks dislike it, but at the time the engine
was developed, it was actually an improvement over the "conventional" rear
main seal (which was basically cotton rope back then).
-- Randall
** triumphs@autox.team.net **
Archive: http://www.team.net/archive
|