Hi,
Just tried to fit my Mk3 swinging arm to the the cradle and it will not slide into position. The swinging arm is the original one with new bushes and sealing discs. The swing arm had been powder coated, but I had dressed back the surface that mates with the sealing disc to remove the coating in that area. The cradle is brand new original Norton (not new manufacture), still in the original finish. The bush/sealing disc swept surfaces are perfectly smooth and there is no raised edge to interfere with the bushes sliding into place. The new bushes and sealing discs were supplied by A-N and fitted with an M12 bolt, nut and washers that smoothly pulled the bushes into place without issue.
I have measured the cradle width at 95.90 mm and the bushes spacing at 95.5 mm, so that appears to be the problem. I intend to carefully remove the bushes, if I can without damaging them, and see if there was any material pick up on the outer surfaces when they were fitted that might be trapped and preventing full seating. Or perhaps there is still a little powder coat remaining needs removing. The seals got nipped a little by the edge of the cradle, but they are not cheap, hopefully will still be usable if refitted with nipped areas at the 12 o-clock position, and I will also slightly radius the edge of the cradle to prevent the seals being nipped again.
Has anyone else experienced similar issues and how were they resolved?
Regards,
Andy
Hi Andrew
Hi Andrew,
I have just had exactly the same problem on the two Mk3`s I`m working on at the moment and I have also managed to ruin two sets of seals! I removed the new bushes and attempted to machine some material from the back faces of the rims but this also proved expensive as the sintered bronze rims bent over rather than cut. After scrapping a few new bushes I did manage to get the some clearance between the bushes and cradle but still couldn`t get the B@$!*** on as the seals still stick out the same amount past the bushes and are very hard to compress enough to fit. I eventually got the first one on useing well lubricated shim steel to guide it on to the cradle (NOS cradle, same as you). The second bike had corrosion on the cradle where salt and water had got behind the original seals so I had to skim these faces up on a milling machine anyway so took enough off to give me clearance without having to machine the bushes. When I measured everything up, old and new, it all seemed about the same so couldn`t really put my finger on what exactly was causing the problem. It`s been a BLOODY NIGHTMARE of a job! Maybe someone out there has the answer?
Best of luck, Al.
- Log in to post comments
Re Mk3 cradle
I have just been through a similar situation, I am rebuilding and repainting my Mk3. As the pin and bushes were in good condition I intended to reuse them, during the lockdown here [New Zealand] I placed an order with one of the major suppliers in the UK for a replacement pair of seals, with the new paint and the UK order here a friend who manages an Engineering shop refitted the bushes and new seals with his press, no way could I get the swingarm back in the cradle, it appeared there was a difference .035" between the cradle and swingarm, as I had damaged the seals I ordered a replacement set this time from Andover, on arrival my friend set out to identify the problem, the outcome was that the original bushes that we had reused had an o.d. of 41.26mm where as the first set of replacement seals were only 41mm between the lips of the seal therefor stopping the bush from seating properly, the second set of replacement seals [from Andover] measured 42.4mm as did the old set that were fitted when the bike was pulled apart, thickness for both [excluding the lip] was 1.143mm.
- Log in to post comments
Swinging arm seals
The original Metzeler seals that I have just removed on my mk2 850 roadster which I have owned since new are 1mm / 0.040” thick, so if the AN ones are 1.143mm I.e. 0.045” then you have ten thou too small a gap between the cradle faces and the bush faces ?? No wonder you had problems getting it to fit
- Log in to post comments
Re Swingarm fitting
Neil, the seals I brought from Andover were fine, it was the first set I brought from another supplier that caused me grief.
- Log in to post comments
My measurements
Cradle width 3.767" or 95.68 mm as you call it.
The swinging arm should fall under it`s own weight when assembled on the cradle but even with ten thou clearance, the seals are so tight that it`s stiff to move. The problem with skimming the bushes is that they get recessed further into the seals which themselves remain unchanged. I think if I were doing it again I would remove material from the swinging arm inside faces that the bushes and seals are pressed up to, which would keep the bush to seal relationship the same, as they would both move outwards to create the larger gap needed. Best done on a milling machine of course but careful use of a large flat file would also do as it wouldn`t have to be perfect because once the bush is fitted, the rim would be square to the axis anyway.
Regards, Al.
P.S. Could just be that all these NOS swinging arms and cradles we`ve been buying have been in the back rooms all these years for good reasons!
- Log in to post comments
dimensions
It would be very useful to have a summary of good solutions to this probably common problem as a post on this thread, including where to buy correctly dimensioned seals and bushes.
- Log in to post comments
Swinging arm seals
Hi, had the same issue whilst rebuilding mine a couple of months ago, i too cleaned all traces of paint from mating faces even removed the paint right to the edge of the cradle to allow a lead in, all to no avail.
In the end i purchased a pair of new seals from AN and found these to be more supple and slightly thinner (sorry didn't log the dimension), greased them and they were still tight but went in with no damage. The previous seals were from another Norton dealer and were a bit cheaper, but happy in the end with the AN more expensive ones, paying more hurts sometimes but pays dividends.
Really don't want to do that job again.
Cheers, Ian
- Log in to post comments
Installing Mk3 Swinging Arm
Only last month I too had this problem when renewing my swinging arm bushes and seals. On closer inspection I found the metal backing of the seals was over 0.030" thicker that the original ones. I explained this to the supplier and eventually he offered me my money back! (£22.00 +VAT!)
I did eventually manage to skim the seals where the flange of the bushes sit, in the lathe, to give the appropriate clearance but would have prefered to have the correct seals in the first place!
- Log in to post comments
Correct swing arm???
Andrew:
Are you sure that the swingarm that you got back from the coaters was the original swingarm that you supplied to them?
I would think that the coaters have a number of swingarms going thru their shop at the same time and possibly yours got mixed up. Was there anyway for you to confirm the return of the one that you supplied to them?
Mike
- Log in to post comments
I bought a new swing arm kit…
I bought a new swing arm kit for my Mk1 850, the spindle had seized in the bushes and was badly corroded, having hammered the old one out, the bushes seemed fine.
I was told that the bushes are extremely hard wearing and would probably not require changing. I checked the new spindle in the old bushes and it was a good sliding fit.
It's all together and is fine.
- Log in to post comments
My solution
To update on my issue and the solution I found, I carefully removed the new bushes and seals with a threaded rod, nuts and washers. The bushes had not picked up when originally fitted, so there was no rolled material preventing full seating. The swinging arm end faces still had slight traces of powder coat, and though of no appreciable thickness. certainly not enough to have caused the problem, I cleaned them off anyway.
I then compared the original seals with the new A-N supplied items. Interestingly, the bush facing surface of the original seals' steel disc was bare metal, whereas the new ones were rubber coated - first photo. The new seals measured at an average 0.006" greater thickness, though the originals were not in the best condition, so it was hard to be accurate. I took a newly sharpened, narrow wood chisel and carefully removed the rubber coating; not that easy, but it did come off and left a pretty clean surface -- photo 2. With the rubber removed, the seals were approximately 0.005-7" thinner, allowing the bushes to sit slightly further towards the swinging arm, thus providing a little more cradle clearance. The bushes and seals were then refitted to the swinging arm.
The cradle edge was not raised at all, but I dressed it with a file to prevent any sharpness cutting the seals. With a coating of 140 oil on the cradle, the swinging arm was offered up and this time it slid straight into place - what a relief!
Given that the further cleaning of the swinging arm surfaces had resulted in only minimal material removal, all I can attribute the successful fit to is removal of the rubber from the bush contact surface on the seal discs.
Andy
- Log in to post comments
Swinging arm seals thickness
Just in process of doing this job. Problem is the thickness of the backing plate on the new seals. The original ones are Metzeler and are spot on 1mm thick i.e. 0.040” (40 thou) . It looks like any new ones available are anything from 5 to 20 thou thicker so ignoring the lip compression there is no clearance between the face of the swing arm oilite top hat bushes and the gearbox cradle faces. No way will it fit and no way could the ends of the swinging arm be ‘sprung’ out as it is a very stiff design for good reason. Also there would metallic interference on the bush and cradle faces which is highly undesirable !!
- Log in to post comments
Second Photo
For some reason, though attached just like the first photo, thecond photo did not appear in the above post?? Here , it is.
Andy
- Log in to post comments
Mk3 swing arm on Mk2 engine cradle.
I purchased a new Mk3 interstate in 1975 when they went on sale in 76.,I loved the bike but since I owned a74 850 and a 70 750 with RH shift I kept having trouble lifting up the brake lever and and pressing down on the shifter to brake. Neither of which worked well. In 1977 I took the rear swing arm off of my Mk3 and adapted it to my 74 850 complete with rear disc and added an AP Rear Master Cylinder to make my race bike. It worked very well. Many years later (now) I was thinking about adding a MK3 swingarm to my MK2 for the support and strength however how do I mount my rear drum brake? Any one have ideas or have tried it.
mike
- Log in to post comments
I wouldn't bother. The MK3…
I wouldn't bother. The MK3 swing arm isn't that much stiffer than a late Mk2 850 and you're not going to see much benefit for all the trouble.
But, if you're determined, then weld a brake stop on, either by building up the end plate to reproduce the pre-Mk3 or weld a boss on the left arm near the cross brace for a tie rod. Then add a cable stop somewhere convenient.
Next you'll have to do something about the spindle, Mk3 is 17mm, earlier is 9/16". If you replace the bearing and other spacers in the wheel hub then you can get 17mm thru. And dispense with the stub axle in the brake drum giving a stiffer one-piece axle.
Far easier, and better: run a Mk3 disc rear end and rework the left footrest hanger and brake pedal to carry a master cylinder - plenty of options there. Or, keep the rear brake cable but use it to operate a master cylinder placed up near the battery.
- Log in to post comments
When I got my Mk3, it was a…
When I got my Mk3, it was a non-running butchered mongrel, having been crudely converted to r/h gear change. Though a disc rear wheel was physically in place, the swinging arm had clearly been adapted for a drum brake by welding on metal underneath the left arm near the rear to create a slot for the brake plate anti-rotation peg. Not sure how well it worked, but the bike had clearly been used with the drum brake. I cut that metal addition off when I started restoring the bike. May have photo of it at home.
- Log in to post comments
Thanks, Neill.
I can see why suggest distortion, but with the Mk3's large box-section crossmember so close the bush locations, i would have thought that would be less likely? When I get the bushes out again - always easier to fit than remove, specially without damaging them - I will let you know what I find.
Andy
And