HPRE

Menu

Members Rides

My Bullet Finished At Last


in
Members Rides

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
July 30, 2014, 01:11:53 AM

Login with username, password and session length

 

Author Topic: Another question about identification  (Read 1392 times)

ERC

  • Grand Gearhead
  • *****
  • Posts: 1484
  • Karma: 0
Re: Another question about identification
« Reply #30 on: August 08, 2013, 09:56:30 PM »
That will be interesting if you can get it on this site. I've had to print them out and scan them back into the computer. Or save them in the computer.  ERC
2-57 Apaches, 2-57 Trailblazers, 60 Chief, 65 Interceptor, 2004 Bullet, 612 Bullet chopped.

classicrider

  • Neophyte
  • *
  • Posts: 20
  • Karma: 0
Re: Another question about identification
« Reply #31 on: August 09, 2013, 04:10:41 AM »
What i don't understand is that Mr H had new rods made,the insert type.Now we know the Rod without the inserts is identical or was back in the day,so why didn't they have some made with a little more alloy in the bearing area that could have been machined as insert free Rods.Beats me ???perhaps they just need this pointing out to them.
colin.

ERC

  • Grand Gearhead
  • *****
  • Posts: 1484
  • Karma: 0
Re: Another question about identification
« Reply #32 on: August 09, 2013, 06:12:27 PM »
On the new rods he's selling you also have to rebalance the crank I think. Also maybe a thing with which models are popular enough for the investment.  ERC
2-57 Apaches, 2-57 Trailblazers, 60 Chief, 65 Interceptor, 2004 Bullet, 612 Bullet chopped.

Roger ONeill

  • Neophyte
  • *
  • Posts: 21
  • Karma: 0
Re: Another question about identification
« Reply #33 on: August 12, 2013, 04:13:50 PM »
Good Day all,

I think I have this figured out, so here is the post from Hitchcock's. We have been fooling around with different connecting rods that we have borrowed from friend. We had three different types of R.E. rods and each one has it's own problem. We have sent one last question off to Hitchcock's and we hopefully will have a final solution tomorrow.

Cheers,
Roger

ERC

  • Grand Gearhead
  • *****
  • Posts: 1484
  • Karma: 0
Re: Another question about identification
« Reply #34 on: August 12, 2013, 09:21:49 PM »
Nice I.D. chart.   ERC
2-57 Apaches, 2-57 Trailblazers, 60 Chief, 65 Interceptor, 2004 Bullet, 612 Bullet chopped.

Roger ONeill

  • Neophyte
  • *
  • Posts: 21
  • Karma: 0
Re: Another question about identification
« Reply #35 on: August 21, 2013, 03:52:22 PM »
Good Afternoon all,

Well I guess that we have the final answer about the connecting rod for the 1956 Super Meteor. Here is the last note from Allan at Hitchcock's. Thanks for all of your suggestions.

Roger,

 

41719 and 41720 are the same rod, I note that you already have 41720 which fits your crank. These are the best of the Enfield twin rods and would be good to use if you can.  I would look at seeing if you could modify the crankcase to give clearance for the bolts or possibly machine the rods to allow the bolts to sit further down.

This is not something I have tried to do before, but I am guessing that there not much extra room would be needed.
Regards, Allan
Hitchcock's Motorcycles Ltd.


rotorwrench

  • Bulleteer
  • ***
  • Posts: 179
  • Karma: 0
Re: Another question about identification
« Reply #36 on: August 21, 2013, 06:58:30 PM »
Cases with the "7T" marking are the early Trailblazer 700. There were three cases for the 692cc models. The early Meteor and the 56 to mid 57 Super Meteor case were a lot alike except no oil filter in the timing cover. The 58 models starting in mid to late 1957 had the removalble cam bearings and the late crankshaft for the replaceable bearing shells that had the triangle shaped cheeks on the outside. All the round cheek cranks were earlier design that used one piece con rods (no replaceable bearing shells). All of the twins from 58 on used the same con rods whether 500, 700, or 750 models. The 750 or 736cc have a little more room in the crankcase for the bigger crank but the crank looks a lot like the 58 & on 700 type.

If you have the earlier 55/57 Trailblazer engine then the case was set up for the round type crankshaft and had solid con rods. The 58 Trailblazer was nearly the same as the Conny except for the cams (T-Blazer used two Super Meteor exhaust cams and the Conny used the same cams as the later 750 models) and the type of carburetor. T-Blazer had the Amal 389 and the Conny had the Amal 10TT9 like the 58 Apache used. Some Connies had the twin Y manifolds and two special carbs to work on it. The Trailblazer kept the SR2 mag and the Conny went to the K2F with manual spark adjust. The 58 & later Apache engine was nearly identical to the Conny engine in the same time frame. I have one of these motors but I don't have the K2F mag or the 10TT9 carb.
« Last Edit: August 21, 2013, 07:04:12 PM by rotorwrench »

Roger ONeill

  • Neophyte
  • *
  • Posts: 21
  • Karma: 0
Re: Another question about identification
« Reply #37 on: September 03, 2013, 03:18:39 PM »
Good morning All,

This is just a note to let you know how we made out with the crank case problem and to thank you for your suggestions. We decided to follow Hitchcock's last suggestion which was made by a couple of you early on in thediscussion. We used connecting rods 141719 (marked 141720/a) and removed the square edges from the front and back of the connecting rods near the big end. We do not feel this would have an effect on the integrity of the rod. We also used the tapered cap bolts and reduced the depth of the bolt head by about 1/8 of its original height. Once installed in the cases there was no fouling at the bottom of the crank cases. Now all we have to be concerned about if and when we get thing running is the expansion of things whenit gets heated up.

Cheers,
Roger

Roger ONeill

  • Neophyte
  • *
  • Posts: 21
  • Karma: 0
Re: Another question about identification
« Reply #38 on: February 28, 2014, 05:55:49 PM »
Good morning Royal Enfield People,

It has been a while since I have informed you about our progress with what we now suspect to be a 1956 Super Meteor. We have been working diligently and have almost reached topoint of getting the thing started. With that in mind does anyone know how many degrees BTC and fully advanced things are when doing the timing. I would rather use a degree wheel than trying to measure 3/8" accurately.  I have attached a picture of the bike so far. The tin ware is not all correct but we think it works.

Cheers,
Roger