Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Is this damage or has a purpose

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Is this damage or has a purpose

    First time out in the garage to have a look at my 58 Hawkstone project. Its looking more and more beyond my ability to fix/restore. So much needs to be done and having no/little experience dont help me . Its got so many modifications (not least the unusual cradle holds a 10E engine) At least got the head off and the piston glides nicely in the bore. My first glance at the clutch cover suggested completely trashed. But is there something else going on here? The holes/slots apear to have been cut out in the cover and the inside of the cover has had some serious modifiying. Its almost like it was done to observe clutch wear or something? I am just being daft? (another odd addition is a BVF carb)
    Attached Files
    Last edited by MarkM; 14/02/2018, 05:17 PM.

  • #2
    Looks like the mice have been at it. seriously as you dont have the missing pieces welding is OTT, best to look for another cover.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by John Wakefield View Post
      Looks like the mice have been at it. seriously as you dont have the missing pieces welding is OTT, best to look for another cover.
      Can't help feeling something else going on here John, the cover has been flattened behind the 'D' shaped hole and there has been significant welding . Is it fanciful to think that Greeves experimented with the 10E ?

      The crank area looks a bit odd too ??
      Attached Files
      Last edited by MarkM; 14/02/2018, 06:10 PM.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by MarkM View Post
        Can't help feeling something else going on here John, the cover has been flattened behind the 'D' shaped hole and there has been significant welding . Is it fanciful to think that Greeves experimented with the 10E ?

        The crank area looks a bit odd too ??
        More like some back street mechanic thought he knew better than Villiers, definitely not of Greeves doing. in any case they did not use the 10E (a 9E with a vertical cylinder) used by James & Francis Barnet.

        Comment


        • #5
          Mark, the cut away, was probably done to allow a brake pedal to be set in closer to avoid snagging or catching tree stumps etc on a trial section, it was probably done whilst the engine was in another frame.

          Comment


          • #6
            Like Dave said, but the cutout at the top used for spaying the primary chain with an aerosol????

            Comment


            • #7
              John,

              The 9E and 10E are exactly the same engine apart from the two outer covers which have the horizontal lines at a different angle. The lines on the 10E are lower at the front so they appear horizontal when the front of the engine is mounted higher to make the cylinder upright. Other than the outer cases, all the part numbers are the same.

              Brian.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by dave higgins View Post
                Mark, the cut away, was probably done to allow a brake pedal to be set in closer to avoid snagging or catching tree stumps etc on a trial section, it was probably done whilst the engine was in another frame.
                Like that idea Dave. The cradle looks non-standard and I think (possibly) has been made specifically to house this 10E (although without checking alignments a 9E might go in)
                Last edited by MarkM; 14/02/2018, 08:47 PM.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Yes I did know that Brian, but James & Fanny B mounted it with cylinder vertical Greeves & other maufacturers inclined the 9E version forward. Usually James & Fanny B had their name on chain case instead of Villiers. As I said previously Greeves did not fit the 10E. The 9E and 10E are interchangeable within the engine plates.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by John Wakefield View Post
                    Yes I did know that Brian, but James & Fanny B mounted it with cylinder vertical Greeves & other maufacturers inclined the 9E version forward. Usually James & Fanny B had their name on chain case instead of Villiers. As I said previously Greeves did not fit the 10E. The 9E and 10E are interchangeable within the engine plates.
                    John, are the engine plates on my bike standard they look a lot broader than normal?

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Job to say from that angle.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Looks like slimline crankcase from photo of the left hand side could be 36/37A type but would need to see right hand side as could be 11E type

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          This is the flywheel, looks a bit odd too - can't find similar on web. lots more holes than normal? looks more crudely machined than you might expect too
                          Attached Files

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            I don't think it is a 10E. More like a 1H; 224cc, or 2H, 246cc. Is it a 66mm bore, Mark, or 63mm? They share much with the twin engines, and that appears to be a 2T-type flywheel. If so, it would explain the non-standard engine plates.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Brian Catt View Post
                              ..the cutout at the top used for spaying the primary chain?
                              Well, at least it wouldn't have puppies
                              Colin Sparrow

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X