Skip to main content
English French German Italian Spanish

Lapping Inter head/barrel joint

Forums

Hello again folks, hope you don’t mind all these questions…

I ran up my newly acquired Inter for the first time in my custody yesterday, it’s the first fire up it’s had in a year and looked/sounded fine with the exception of an oil weep and visible/audible ‘chuff’ of gases from the head/barrel joint when warm. So it looks like I’m going to have to re-lap the joint. I’m digging up as much info as I can on the process but keen to hear any wisdom from anyone with experience of this job. Bike is a 1950 plunger alloy engine 500cc clubman.

Main question - can I remove/refit cam box, head and barrel with the motor in the frame?

Any joint-lapping advice, technique etc? I have seen the post with the G. Cohen sketch & notes on lapping with grinding paste etc, maybe that’s all I need to know?

As ever, any advice much appreciated in anticipation of a slightly frightening first attempt at delving into the inner workings.

Cheers, Bruce

 

Permalink

Yes.. you should be able to remove with engine in frame.

The barrel should come off.  It's not as difficult a task as hinted by by George's instructions because you won't be re-shimming or assembling from non matching parts.

Removing and replacing the vertical shaft without displacing or changing the positions of the Oldham couplings needs care.  Especially replacing it.  But at least you don't have the Dommie pushrods to get back in place.

Having only one piston and a fairly generous lead in at the bottom of the barrel makes replacing it not nearly as awkward as with the Twins.  Watch out for the little oil feed tubes when you put the head back on.  Easy to miss them.

Permalink

Barrel and clean head on the bench. The secret with lapping is to use very little pressure, a fine paste and keep moving the components 90 degrees at a time. Use the finest of the carborundum valve pastes, do not use a diamond paste.

Get the faces clean and use some engineer's blue to see where things are touching or not. Draw what you see. Add a trace of paste all round, try four 90 degree 'rotates', lift and move the head around 90 degrees, 'rotate', repeat two more times to get back to the start, clean it all up and do the blue test again. Does it look better? Repeat until you get clean blue lines on both components.

I have re-machined a head and barrel for a friend who lapped his 'to death' trying to make it seal. He had created seven thou of error in the joint, so beware!

Permalink

I use fine grinding paste on the narrow joint and coarse paste on the wide (outer) joint. This makes it seal on the inner face, and the outer face stops it distorting.

John

Permalink

…for the advice, much appreciated. I have it dismantled now and it all looks fine but with the spigot 0.002” less than the recess so I’ll re-lap as per notes above starting with the flange face only and blueing as I go and hopefully with a bit of care and patience Bob will end up being my uncle.

cheers, Bruce

Permalink

If you are 2thou short on the spigot and you intend to end up with circa 2 thou clearance  on the flange. To pull down the sealing ring on the spigot you are reducing the height of the head barrel assembly by circa 5 thou.  This may diminish the tolerance in your Oldham couplings. After tightening up the head rebuild initially without the tube so you can confirm sufficient clearance. Be carful when tightening down the cambox , it needs to sit on each of the four posts and not sit up on an Oldham coupling.  J

Permalink

Is there a good reason to lap the joint rather than simply add the gasket used by later ES2?  This sits on the broad face so the Oldham couplings will be that small distance further apart.

Permalink

The spigot provides the seal for the combustion chamber not the flange. By pulling the head down onto the spigot it ensures a uniform load on the joint.  Trying to do that on the width of the flange mating surface would not give the same result.

Jon

Permalink

ES2 gasket post war sits between the broad outer surfaces.  I believe it is alloy, but I don't know.  But it certainly seals on the broad flange.

Permalink

….with  the consequential gap above the spigot? Wills ring??J

Permalink

…was sitting on top of four identical thickness washers… I reassembled minus the tube as per G Cohen practice to clock the drive shaft vertical float before touching the head - 0.051” I think I read somewhere between 0.010 and 0.030 being the range to aim for but will check when the time comes. I didn’t bother measuring again sans washers but will check everything thoroughly once the head joint has been finalised. I suspect the washers were added to assist rocker/valve contact angles and opened up the shaft clearance, but as I say will eyeball and measure as I go once the head and barrel are back in place and brace myself for the likelihood of having to adjust the Oldham clearances (cue another thread…). Point taken re. making sure the cam box sits squarely on all four feet Jonathan, thanks. If it doesn’t what’s the method to level it all out… shims?

As an aside, my first Norton in the early 1990’s was a featherbed ES2 and my father (I was a rookie mechanical observer at this point) had a real job getting a reliable head joint with the aluminium gasket.

Permalink

…each of your posts. Fit them and measure the finished height. Consider moving the posts to alternative (all) positions to get the best match. Once you have the data adjust the length of the posts to give you the tallest combined fit.  Identify the post to position (number stamp both)so that it’s clear which location the post will occupy. Then you may need to consider equal sized shims/spacers to get your stack height right.

Sounds like you have a good handle on what to do.

Enjoy, 

Jon

 

 

Permalink

According to Franks: "A distance washer is fitted in the bottom of the cylinder-head nut recesses; care should be taken that none of these are lost".  They are certainly original.  The danger is of course that the feet of the cambox don't all sit down at the same time...disaster beckons!

The other curiosity is if the bottom rocker seal adjuster screws project too far down and contact the head before the cambox is in place....

Permalink

…the washers Franks is referring to are those in the top head recess for tightening the head bolts against, which are present and correct. The four that I discovered were fitted between the cambox and the top of the main studs from the crankcase mouth which the cambox sits on, the ‘posts’ if you prefer. Looking at the exploded diagram these washers aren’t part of the original assembly and as I understand things are a common workaround to achieve either acceptable shaft clearance or rocker/valve strike angle, or a bit of both. Despite the fact they aren’t original, I’m keeping an open mind as to whether or not to re-fit them again depending on how it all maps out. Although I’m happy to listen to any advice on this. All the posts and head bolts are match marked already which I’m sure is a good sign.

I’ll keep an eye out for the seal adjusters David, thanks for highlighting that. My cambox has had adjusters added to the top as well, not sure if that’s regarded as a good or bad thing, I’ve yet to open it but intend replacing the wiper seals while it’s off.

The bike is new to me, and although I wish to treat it with due care, I’m really just keen to get it running nicely, put a few miles on it in the spring and work it all out from there as there will undoubtedly be a lot of wee niggles as it comes back to life. I get the feeling it’s done next to nothing for decades and although the top end was re-done at fair expense in 2014 by someone apparently well versed in SOHC rebuilds, it has only covered 8 miles since and I think I’m mainly dealing with the old enemy of degradation due to time and lack of use. I’m only saying all of this as a line in the sand as to where I think I am in space with it and what my hopes are.

Permalink

Sounds like you know what you are up to, better than I.  There are earlier posts on this site about lapping the joint.  Not much about difference between alloy and iron engines.  Paul Norman's "racing vincent" site describes his engine rebuild in detail. His also had top seal adjusters.  They can be very close to the frame but if yours were there before you took it apart you'll know that.  He and (I think) George warn about possibly damaging the cambox legs if they don't bear down equally.  Possibly that's likely  to happen if the head has distorted and been ground flat.  Check with thin feeler gauges that there's no gap under any one foot when the other three are in contact.

Permalink

… It might sound like I know what I’m up to, reality is I just think I know what I’m up to at best, sometimes I don’t really know how to approach a task properly at all, and seek the approval or warnings or advice etc. of all of you chaps who have been there many times before. I find this forum and a few similar for other machinery a great source of help and encouragement, and caution, in equal measure, and appreciate it very much. Up here in Scotland specialist ‘help at hand’ can often be scarce so it’s beneficial to be as competent as possible, fortunately I enjoy it too. Points noted above re. Cambox legs, I’m going to make a start to the head joint prep this week and take things from there.

cheers, Bruce

Permalink

Were fitted on one of my machines, a Stu Rogers mod as I remember. If you feel they are beyond use make sure you get wipers with the canvas core not just rubber.

The slight complication with this type of motor is the lack of a splined connection between top and bottom bevel.  ( The one nice feature of the Moore version and latter day Manx). Keep this in mind when you assemble from the crankcase up.

Enjoy it!

Permalink

Good news first. Success with head joint, motor goes well, Stu Roger’s cam tube o-ring and spacer seal set-up works a treat, I’m even slowly working out how to start it (this one has a great thirst, you need to get plenty fuel in there). And I even had my first 2 mile test run. Footrests are a nightmare, gear change so very difficult, the gap between first and second is breathtaking… but all tweakable given time and miles and familiarity.

More pressing (and the bad news) is the oil pulsing out of the cylinder base, mostly by the near side rear stud. It’s excessive by anyone’s standards. I’ve done a few ‘clean up and look again’ tests with a slave fuel tank, torches, and strategically stuffed tissues, and it’s definitely eminating from the base upwards, presumably the rear cylinder feed, and is moving out under pressure. My bottom barrel joint assembly was simply a thorough clean of faces and spacer, and two new base gaskets coated in grease. That was maybe wishful thinking and I should have used sealer. I made sure the gaskets were clearing the oil feed holes in the crankcase. The rear oil feed screw was over two turns out, half a turn out didn’t stop it. Screwing home fully did.

And so, the next raft of questions. Let’s ignore the prime suspect of the base gasket joint being the culprit for the moment… as that’s the obvious place to go but I wish to think about other causes before dismantling it all again so soon…

Pressure relief valve - is it possible that if the ball was stuck on its seat the pressure could be so great to the rear cylinder that it could overcome the gaskets rather than simply over-oil the piston and/or push excessive oil up to the cambox? My barrel has four drillings.

And in the likely event that the barrel has to come off again, do I need to re-lap with the head or just clean and reassemble?

Should I have used sealer at the base joint in the first place?

Any other thoughts as to possible source of the trouble?

cheers again, Bruce

Permalink

I used Wellseal but of course I don't know what would have happened if I hadn't used it.  It doesn't leak enough to notice.

Removal and replacement of head and barrel isn't anywhere near as much of a task as rebuilding.  You don't have shims to worry about, nor rebuilding the cambox.  The awkward task is relocating the Oldham couplings.  But that's easier than replacing with Dominator push rods.

Regarding the gap from 1st to 2nd.  Thanks to Barry's advice I bought the Daytona first gear kick start set from RGM and the bike is now much more usable in traffic.

 

Permalink

Hi Bruce,

    What might be the problem with your engine is the ball bearing not seating or the spring is too weak or broken. These will allow excessive oil flow through the valve, first to the barrel and then the cambox. The factory service guide states the ball should be re-seated by giving the ball a sharp tap using a hammer and drift to reform the softer aluminium. You should fit a new spring as the original will be 70+ years old. The feed to the cambox should be around 8 psi, so you will need an oil pressure gauge to set this. It is best to use a clean dry gasket with a thin coat of non-hardening sealer on all 4 faces.

   When grinding the head/barrel joint you should use fine paste on the spigot and coarse paste on the outer joint in a concurrent operation. What this does is to make a fractional gap on the outer face to make sure the spigot joint closes first. Use sealer direct on all the contact areas.

Permalink

…is fitted with a thick-ish locknut and a fibre washer.  Looking at Paul Normans online shop the locknuts are made purposely thin. I’m guessing now, but it seems logical that the elongated pin on the screw that goes through the spring should be able to push the ball firmly against it’s seat in the case (ie clamped shut) and that this is the ‘screwed fully home’ position? Then turn screw back 2.5-3 turns and lock, allowing the ball to then pop that small pre-set distance off its seat as oil pressure overcomes spring pressure?

with the locknut wound fully out against screw head mine feels like it’s tightening against the fibre washer as opposed the ball, which may well explain why I’m seeing this excess oil to the barrel - in that once screwed ‘home’ then adjusted back out, the screw is in actual fact much more than 3 turns out from the ball being clamped so the spring is in less compression and will allow ball to open under less pressure, with a bigger opening, more oil through? Is Columbo right on this occasion?

Just one more thing… thanks again to all for the advice.

cheers, Bruce

Permalink

Hi Bruce,

   Your conclusions sound correct, but you should dispence with the fibre washer as the lock nut should be hard up against the casting as the washer takes away the locking action. The number of turns out will not be a definite as the pump might be worn or you could be using a thinner oil or possibly some other variable. The cylinder feed only needs half a turn out unless you are using a forged aluminium piston. 

   Using an Inter on the road in the area where I live is a pain, pulling away from traffic lights up a 1 in 10 incline ( of which there are many ) is never good for the clutch. Second gear is good for 75mph which is breaking the speed limit, and third and fourth are so close you can forget which you are using. You might find it an easier ride to fit the ES2 cluster but using the Inter first gear as this will be almost the same as the early AMC gearbox and will improve your 0 to 60mph time which is safer getting onto a busy road.

 


Norton Owners Club Website by 2Toucans