project 1980 Austin Princess

[Dick Cheeseburger]

26 minutes ago, vulgalour said:

That was a fun project. I have been plotting some more lace paint, as it happens, I just haven't settled on a design yet and I want to see how the car looks in just the black and pink before I start making it any fussier.  The black wing mirrors are making a comeback, and the Lotus wheels too once I've got the paint to sort those out.  This was 2013/4, how time flies!

I remember some sort of lines with lots of 90* angles? Bit like the tubes screensaver from Windows 95?! 

[vulgalour]

oh, that was the second iteration!  I'd forgotten about that.

Lotus wheels haven't been forgotten either.  Remember those?

 

[Dick Cheeseburger]

1 minute ago, vulgalour said:

oh, that was the second iteration!  I'd forgotten about that.

Lotus wheels haven't been forgotten either.  Remember those?

 

That's the one!

The Lotus wheels really need to happen.

[Angrydicky]

Surely a Marina O series would have a different crank, being RWD?

[vulgalour]

I don't know?  Can I swap the crank out of the FWD into the RWD?  I can't find anything conclusive about the compatibility of RWD and FWD O series, just hearsay of "it's the same engine, it should work" and, on the face of it, they do look the same.

[320touring]

Loving the pink - like an automotive Zoot suit😍

[vulgalour]

Just had a quick browse of the archives for some engine refs.  With the clutch assembly being on the end (or back, in the Marina) of the block I'd being working on the understanding it would be the same crank application since the crank is driving all of this to connect via cogs to the gearbox in the sump, rather than the gearbox sticking off the back of the engine.

But if that's not the case, I'm happy to be educated before spending money.  On all of the pictures of the RWD application I've seen, all the bits look the same except for the gearbox which is the conventional long thing for the Marina etc, and this stubby satellite thing on the Princess.  I honestly don't know which approach BL would have taken in the development on this, the gearbox in sump is already weird enough so it wouldn't surprise me at all if the actual engine, crank, etc. was exactly the same between the two.  Then again, I say that as an engine luddite so I'm probably talking out of my bottom.

Edited to add:  the gearbox end of a Marina/RWD application engine.  I'm guessing/hoping the shaft in the Princess clutch housing thingy goes into the end of the crankshaft just the same on this engine as on the Princess.  Everything else (sump aside) looks identical between RWD and FWD application.

[Slowsilver]

6 hours ago, vulgalour said:

Engine wise, there's one popped up in Buckingham on eBay (well two, technically, with the same seller) that's NOS from a Marina and I'm probably going to go for that one since it's easier to collect and we've made a space for it to live until I'm ready to fit it, providing it remains in budget.

Don't know how far away you are but I am in Buckingham so if you wanted me to give the engine(s) a quick once over and maybe take some photos of the crank end let me know the address and I could pop round.
 

[vulgalour]

Thank you for the offer, if I need to call you in as our expert in the field, I will We're about 2 hours drive from Buckingham, as it happens.

Been doing some more searching and I'm moderately certain the crankshafts are actually the same.  Over on LeylandPrincess there's a handy engine rebuild with a useful shot of the gearbox end http://www.leylandprincess.co.uk/enginerebuild.htm

This looks, to my eye, the same as the same end on the Marina.  Aronline has an article on the O Series and it's suggested there that the benefit of the O Series was that it could be mated to both the FWD gearbox and the RWD gearbox and used pretty much across the entire range as a result with minimal cost.  Additionally, there's a couple of crankshafts listed on eBay as being suitable for both Marina, Sherpa, Princess, and Ambassador applications and while none of this is absolute knowledge, it does all point at it arguably being a straight swap for the engine at least.  I feel like it's a calculated risk at this point, though an expensive one.

[sloth]

it is the same engine, however some holes may be untapped - giggle. 

its the e series and a series and b series that are differeent due to those whiny drop- gears

[dozeydustman]

Playing catch-up.

I saw paint and was expecting something similar to the Lanchester’s oily rag resto appearance.

Not what Inwas expecting but I like it!

[vulgalour]

Another little paint update.  With what was left in my first 1 litre tin I had a bit of an experiment off car with some thinners and found that if I thinned the paint to more the consistency of single cream it actually didn't dry as quickly and could be dressed out.  However, once thinned and done on a larger area than my test sample, I found the paint wasn't actually flowing as well as I'd like and drying with brush streaks in.  This isn't the end of the world, however, because I now know roughly how much to dilute the paint so that I'll have enough time to dress it with a brush after applying with a gloss roller, per @puddlethumper's recommendation.  I feel like I'm in a more comfortable place with it.  The bonnet was easily one of the worst panels for the streaky look, as you can see in this close up.

The other issue is that the first coat of paint hasn't hardened as much as I need it to in order to take out the worst of the problems on the surface so I'm going to leave this for about a week before having another stab at it.  Experience has taught me it takes 4-6 days with synthetic enamels, when used outdoors in cooler weather, before it gets hard enough to really cut it back heavily.  At the moment the paint still feels a bit plastic-y, for want of a better description, it's hard enough you can't dig a fingernail into it, but if you go at it too much with sandpaper it just clogs the paper after a while.  After a few days, this plastic feeling goes away and the paint usually sands very nicely.  If you do this job indoors in a heated environment, it hardens much quicker.

It looks okay for now, though I do wish I'd gone with a different, and probably more expensive, brand.  Ah well.  Worst case is I waste my time with this pink and have to redo it with better paint, that's hardly the end of the world.  Also of note is that with the second coat, in person at least, the pink isn't so vibrant and is more towards the colour I expected, more of an orange hue to it in all lights now.

I ran out of thinners today too so I'll get a fresh tin ordered and some decent gloss rollers before we try for coat three.  The first two coats were done with just one litre so I should have more than enough to do the whole thing since I've still got two litres of paint that aren't thinned down just for the pink, and another three litres for the black which is less surface area.

[DeeJay]

You are going to have to get two separate wardrobes now. One for the Lanchester and a Lady Penelope one for the Princess.

[Skut]

Love the pink. It's a bold shape so it needs a bold colour.   

There's an Ambastador in the Aberdeenshire kingdom of rust with complete running gear and displacers. Hardly local but like everything there it's for sale.  Maybe an option when the Covid situation improves?

[stuboy]

20 hours ago, vulgalour said:

silver matt colour coachline to break up the 2 colours..

[High Jetter]

I think it's all Pink, that's just shadow

[vulgalour]

Currently pink over the previous dark red, though the colours are close enough that it does make it look like the red is the pink in shadow.  Eventually it'll be pink over black, like the lower of these two mock-ups I did.

Once I've got the black and pink done, then I can judge whether or not to go with any of the detail pieces like coachlines.  It may get a twin copper line on the pink to echo the original trim option, and I've some badge options that may or may not appear on the car.  Just want to get the black and pink done first and see how I feel afterwards.

 

 

[vulgalour]

The engine plan has changed slightly in that because I'm going to have to at least partially pull apart a new engine to inspect it, might as well pull the one I've got apart first before committing to buying a new engine.  I need to get tools anyway - engine crane and stand of the folding variety ordered so I stand a chance of fitting them in my limited space when out of use - whichever route I go and I'm not in a rush to get this all done.  So, we'll pull the original engine, and go through it to find out what if anything is amiss.  If it turns out the existing engine needs serious work, then I'll buy a new one to replace it and do the inspection thing.  If it turns out the internals on the engine are well within tolerance and the issue is with the head, or just the head gasket, then I'll have sorted the issue for less outlay and have peace of mind that the engine is in good shape.

I'm considering sending both heads to a reputable machine shop and asking them to build one good one out of the best bits of both.  I'm also looking to get the distributor replaced/refurbished while I have everything apart.  The block will also get inspected by someone that knows about engines.  Consider this a winter project, 2020 has been a bust for events anyway so it's a good time to disable the car for a bit to get to the bottom of whatever it is that's wrong with this engine.

[vulgalour]

Found a break between dry spells to stand in the rain and do the compression test today.  Took me a moment to realise I could unscrew the end fitting on the compression tester I bought to get to the smaller fitting and o-ring rather than trying to rely on the rubber cone adaptor, so I'm hoping that has lead to accurate readings.  The readings were consistent, so that's good.

First job is to take out the spark plugs.  1 (I've numbered the cylinders 1-4 from left to right as you look at the engine from the front, easy for me to remember and not get muddled) was paler than the other three so that's where I expected the problem to be.  3 is a bit of a nuisance to get out, thank goodness for ratcheting spanners.

 

Workshop manual tells me the compression ratio is 9:1 on this engine and it should be giving me a reading of 170-195psi.  Here's what I got.

Cylinder - First reading - Second reading
1 - 85 - 80
2 - 158 - 158
3 - 145 - 145
4 - 150 - 150

All those numbers tell me is what I already knew, which is that the head gasket has failed.  I'm guessing the low reading on cylinders 2, 3, and 4 is in part due to the blown head gasket and in part due to 40-odd years of wear and tear on things like the piston rings.

[chompy_snake]

Get the valve guides checked, worn ones can cause low compression readings and sometimes happens without burning oil. 

Something always worth checking on older engines 

[Dick Cheeseburger]

The black in the lower image looks like a massive tide like painted on to hide rot as it creeps up the side of the car. 

[Talbot]

On 10/24/2020 at 3:56 PM, vulgalour said:

Workshop manual tells me the compression ratio is 9:1 on this engine and it should be giving me a reading of 170-195psi.

That's a bit on the hopeful side.  100% volumetric efficiency would achieve just over 132psi.  Not quite as simple as that in the real world, as the valve timing can cock things about a bit, but 195psi would be over 145% volumetric efficiency on a 9:1 engine.  Which I very much doubt is possible.

Normally "over 100psi" is considered a good result for most petrol engines, which would be ~80% volumetric efficiency, which is far more like it.  195psi is getting into turbo-diesel levels of compression pressures.

[colino]

Did you do a wet compression test?   Cylinders 2,3 & 4 are within +/-10% of each other fine for an old engine. 

[vulgalour]

What I did was get the engine up to operating temperature, then pulled the plugs and put the compression tester on.  I assume that's a dry test since I didn't put anything extra in the cylinders.  Last time we did it this way when it didn't have a blown head gasket I'm sure it was getting around the 185psi range, give or take a few psi, across all four cylinders.

Current suspicions are a duff head gasket, worn/damaged valve guides, and worn piston rings.  We'll know better when the engine comes out (stand arrived today, crane will be arriving soon) and can actually have a look.

@Talbot I can only tell you what the book tells me.  I don't really understand the intricacies of ratios and numbers and whatnot, mostly because I have no passion for engine work so never bothered to get into it.

[vulgalour]

The car does use some oil, whether it's leaking out or burning it I'm not certain, but it's always done it since I got the car in February 2012.

Reasons to take the engine out:

• Leaking sump gasket
• I want to paint the block
• Suspected worn piston rings, I've new ones to go in
• I've got a new engine stand that needs breaking in
• Removing, inspecting, and rebuilding the engine would give peace of mind

I'm sure I can come up with more reasons if pushed.  Suffice to say it's happening and it's going to do no harm to do it.  What is a wet compression test going to tell me that a dry one hasn't?  Valve clearances aren't due to be checked yet, I've not finished running things in from when I last did them, and the shims for the Princess were proving so difficult to get in the sizes I needed that last time I ended up having to get a friend in the States to send me some in the sizes needed.

There'll be nothing doing until the engine crane arrives, it stops raining, and I'm motivated to dig into it.  For now, it's OMGHGF and we'll pull everything apart to find out what else is wrong later.

[Talbot]

A wet compression test is very much as it sounds:  You do a compression test, but have to do it in the wet.  As the weather has gotten a lot worse recently, it's a lot easier to do this, as you can time it for when the forecast says it's going to be wet.  At a push, you can get someone with a hosepipe and a sprayer on "mist" to go over you, the car, your tools and the whole working area, but the results aren't as accurate as trying to do a decent wet test in pouring rain.

What you're looking for is the time (usually in minutes) before you give up, shout "fuck this fucking car" and go inside to get dry and warm again.  You then use this number of minutes as a multiplier on the original compression test results to get an over-inflated view of the health of the engine.

Bonus points can be gained for doing a lumpy wet compression test (in hail) or a swirl check test (in a tornado).

[Talbot]

10 hours ago, vulgalour said:

What I did was get the engine up to operating temperature, then pulled the plugs and put the compression tester on.  I assume that's a dry test since I didn't put anything extra in the cylinders.

You're exactly correct on that.  A wet test (despite what I said above) is the same, but you introduce a squirt (maybe 25ml) of engine oil into the cylinder (through the spark-plug port) first.  That will then saturate the rings and any gap between the pistons and bores.  If the compression pressure then jumps up, you have worn rings/bores.  If it stays low, compression is being lost through non-seated valves.

Another good test to do is to make up an adaptor from an old spark plug that allows you to fit an airline to the cylinder.  This is called a blowdown test.  You then "inflate" the cylinder (just open it up to the compressor reservoir) and listen for where the air is coming out.  It will either come out of the oil filler cap (blow past the rings) out the exhaust (exhaust valve not seating) or out the inlet (inlet valve not seating.  It's also a way you can test for a very blown head gasket, as if you get bubbles in the coolant, OMGHGF.

As for the compression pressures.  I'm only commenting that it sounds high, as when you're doing a compression test, you're turning the engine into a compressor.  It draws in atmospheric air at 1bar, and then compresses it to 9 times that pressure (a 9:1 engine), so you'd expect the maximum it could achieve to be 9 bar (132 psi).  The bit about volumetric efficiency is to do with how well the cylinder is filled before it compresses the air in it.  if it's 100% full, that means it's at 1 bar before it starts compressing.  Most engines run at less than 100% volumetric efficiency, hence the cylinder is still at a slight vacuum before the air is compressed, meaning the final figure is a little less than the theoretical maximum.

I absolutely don't doubt your book says 195psi.  I just don't understand how.

[sloth]

odd that your saying 195psi is unacheivable - my Triumph 2500 is sitting at 170psi per pot.  and have seen many modern engines acheive 190psi. 

either way that engines borked. id yank it out and strip it.  no point stripping in situ

[sloth]

also combustion pressure can be affected by bore vs stroke, i.e smaller piston pushes less air but the same c/r 

[Noel Tidybeard]

dog dick pink on a princess- only on AS 🤣