1971 T100c

Triumph Motorcycle Forum - TriumphTalk

Help Support Triumph Motorcycle Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
bearing clearance.
Triumph normally use what's known as a CN3 fit.
check the clearance size of the bearings coming out and use the same to replace.
It has nothing to do with the fit on the shaft
These statements are all incorrect.

There is no such thing as "CN3"; this is likely a poorly-remembered confusion of "C3" and "CN", which are two different bearing "pre-fit" clearances, in addition to C1 and C2.

CN, C1, C2 and C3 are different (but overlapping) internal clearance ranges before the bearing is mounted, one is selected not for either "pre-fit" or "mounted" clearance (the latter fitted but before operation) but to achieve the correct clearance in operation at a stable temperature. Operating clearance is different for different bearing types.

Mounting affects the internal clearance of any bearing - interference-fit in a crankcase compresses the outer race, reducing the bearing's internal clearance; interference-fit on any shaft enlarges the inner race, also reducing the bearing's internal clearance; otoh, slip-fit on any shaft doesn't enlarge only the inner race, so the bearing's internal clearance won't be reduced by that. So the fit of a ball- or roller-bearing on any shaft - crank, axle, etc. - absolutely does affect the bearing's mounted and operating clearances.

To my certain knowledge, Triumph used CN, C2 and C3 at different times on the same/similar engines and at the same time on different engines. Nevertheless, what Triumph did or didn't do half-a-century ago is irrelevant to a rebuild now, particularly when the history of the component isn't known. Longevity is likely most desirable in a rebuild now, so selecting the correct pre-fit clearance to achieve correct operating clearance in the new bearings after the rebuild is the essential.

A new bearing's pre-fit clearances might be the same as the replaced bearing's, if the component is low-mileage and previously-unrebuilt; but something as simple as stretching of the ally around a crankcase bearing housing will alter how much compression it applies to an interference-fit main bearing, altering the "mounted" and "running" clearances of the bearing.

The correct method is to measure both inner (crankshaft?) and outer (crankcase?) bearing mountings, then select CN, C2 or C3 as required for the bearing type. Then, especially if a bearing is interference-fit, DO NOT drive it in/on cold, heat either the outer mounting (crankcase?) or the bearing itself 'til it slips into/ on to the mounting.

Operating clearances
Certainly according to SKF, a ball-bearing should operate virtually without clearance; roller-bearings of all types usually require a little clearance. Too little clearance in both ball- and roller-bearings causes the balls or rollers to 'skate' over race surfaces; too much clearance allows balls or rollers to 'chatter' between the races; too much clearance in a ball-bearing on a crankshaft could prevent it locating the crankshaft correctly.

Do a bit of reading on the subject
... but ensure you are not reading nonsense?

The price of the new mains will be the current hold up of getting it back together.
So you want to buy the correct bearings first time?
 
doing a full rewire and electrical update. Won’t be bringing electrical back to standard.
why would you not want to re fit standard electrics? My 67 Bonneville
You are not comparing like with like. As It says in the thread title, the OP's bike is a '71; for '71, Lucas made several quality reductions from previous years; none of these quality reductions were ever improved again, nor do they aid longevity.

Also, if 52-/53-year-old Lucas electrics continue to work reliably for you, you belong to a very small minority.

I guarantee when you come to sell it buyers will prefer it as original as possible.
You can't guarantee anything of the sort where electrics are concerned. The OP is in the US, any potential buyer with more than the sketchiest knowledge of British bikes will know that even the expensive Podtronics regulator/rectifier replacement for separate Lucas rectifier and Zener diode was invented in the US well over forty years ago because the inventor was dissatisfied with Lucas quality even then - Bill Kizer wrote the name "PODtronics" as a specific reference to the "Prince Of Darkness" epithet.

Reliable new Zeners haven't been available for several years already; the possibility that a white knight supplier will emerge in the future to clear away the current bunch of knaves, fools, chancers and wasters? Dream on.

A knowledgeable potential buyer could well view particularly updated electrics as "desirable mods.".

probably going to have it set up as a bobber for a little while then bring it back to original. The harness that came with the bike is a bit of a mess, I’d like to clean it up. Switch the lights over to LED and what not.
Then it will all be brought that to original.
Trying to bring electrics "back to original" is self-flagellation:-

. As I've written above, just finding a reliable Zener diode is a lottery (and expensive). Then you have to find a matching rectifier ...

. Please don't be taken in by any "Genuine Lucas" label; it's nothing of the sort; it's a cynical marketing exercise by Wassell - a long-time pattern Britbike spares maker with an equally-long and -dismal quality reputation - who pay the current "Lucas" trademark owner for an exclusive-use deal. In some cases, you're stuck with the "Genuine Lucas" part because no-one else can make 'em cheaper (the last word being the operative one) but more-expensive parts - alternator stators and rotors, reg./rec., wiring harnesses, etc. - there are alternatives.

. On ignitions, Daichi points were mixed quality when 'original Lucas' rebranded 'em in the 1970's and far fewer people use 'em now ... no-one's made spares for mechanical auto-advances in forty years ... Ironically, in amongst the replacement electronic ignitions, Wassell appear to have a reliable product ... probably because actual maker Vape won't let 'em do anything more that print the boxes ...

. Lighting:-

.. Headlamp was originally "BPF" (British Pre Focus) bulb type, this was obsolete when Lucas supplied it new. Original incandescent was feeble new and is hopeless now in amongst modern vehicles bristling with LED. There are LED bulbs with a BPF base;if you can afford it, go for the latest 16-LED ones, expensive so don't be taken in by cheaper from Ebay; however, whatever you pay for, it'd definitely be a retrograde step to try and revert to 'original' incandescent.

.. Similarly, an incandescent bulb the standard rear lamp is rubbish for actually warning the SUV driver behind you that you're braking. LED 'bulb' is better but 'best' is a board or mat of LED that replaces all the reflector and bulb-holder junk.

. Wiring harness - If you want off-the-shelf, best in the US is from British Wiring (definitely not "(Genuine) Lucas"). However, ask who'll supply - reason I suggest this is, if it comes from BW's British supplier Autosparks, it'll be an exact copy of the original '71 harness, including all the original quality reductions, plus connections for separate rectifier and Zener, condensers to go with points, etc., etc., all of which'll have to be tidied up if fitting reg./rec., electronic ignition, etc.; otoh, if BW build a harness themselves, they'll sometimes incorporate upgrades to reverse the quality reductions, leave out wires and terminals not required by reg./rec., electronic ignition, etc.

. If a modified BW harness sounds possible, let me know and I'll PM a list of possible mods. to ask about? Or, if you're building the harness from wire and terminals, I'd be happy PM you the detailed spec. I'd use?
 
thanks for all that information. I should clarify, when I say brought back to original I don’t mean the electronics. I’m a huge fan of updated electronics.
When I rewire I will be doing it from scratch. I do have a game plan as far as a wiring diagram goes. But completely open to look at the spec you have.
 
Mmm. Although my memory of CN C3 etc may not have been perfect I simply wanted to point rcrowley in the right direction by alerting him to the fact that bearings of the same size can actually differ and advise him do do his own homework on the subject if he wished. It is never my desire to give the impression I am any kind of Triumph expert, simply a Triumph owner doing his own service work. I deliberately wanted to avoid a three page diatribe on bearing fit since this is something owners can research if they wish. I suspect trying to decide on bearing fit for the average owner using measurement would be tricky. Personally I will simply replace bearings with what comes out given that it seems the majority of old Triumphs have done a surprisingly low mileage and have likely changed very little. This method is unlikely to cause a problem whereas fitting the wrong bearing that is too tight could be really bad news.
 
Mmm. Although my memory of CN C3 etc may not have been perfect I simply wanted to point rcrowley in the right direction by alerting him to the fact that bearings of the same size can actually differ and advise him do do his own homework on the subject if he wished. It is never my desire to give the impression I am any kind of Triumph expert, simply a Triumph owner doing his own service work. I deliberately wanted to avoid a three page diatribe on bearing fit since this is something owners can research if they wish. I suspect trying to decide on bearing fit for the average owner using measurement would be tricky. Personally I will simply replace bearings with what comes out given that it seems the majority of old Triumphs have done a surprisingly low mileage and have likely changed very little. This method is unlikely to cause a problem whereas fitting the wrong bearing that is too tight could be really bad news.
thanks carl well put ,opinions and theory's are like belly buttons everybodys got one ! most of what we know about stuff on this planet is theory , back in the 50s and 60s guys were porting heads and finishing them in a mirror like finish , then back in th 80 a noted flatrack engine builder Tex Peel was interviewed by cycle news a weekly motorcycle paper his Harley 750s were among the fastest on the US flat tracks , he claimed that leaving the intakes a little rough riled up the the fuel mix on its way to the valves . so the theory's change , fact or fiction I don't know but like you say food for thought, these days I carefull what I say on here jim
 
thanks carl well put ,opinions and theory's are like belly buttons everybodys got one ! most of what we know about stuff on this planet is theory , back in the 50s and 60s guys were porting heads and finishing them in a mirror like finish , then back in th 80 a noted flatrack engine builder Tex Peel was interviewed by cycle news a weekly motorcycle paper his Harley 750s were among the fastest on the US flat tracks , he claimed that leaving the intakes a little rough riled up the the fuel mix on its way to the valves . so the theory's change , fact or fiction I don't know but like you say food for thought, these days I carefull what I say on here jim
Thanks Jim. I used to build race car engines where we polished the ports back in the 70's. I remember later reading research that found exactly what you were saying plus that the polished surface also caused unwanted droplets to accumulate on the port walls. I always try to be sensitive to the views of others and wouldn't dream of suggesting someone else is wrong. Once that starts on a forum friendly interaction ceases and people won't post for fear of being shown up. Is not the purpose of a forum to encourage and hopefully help like minded enthusiasts simply through chatting or are we now required to have a degree in engineering before offering comment? I shall refrain from saying more.
 
Thanks Jim. I used to build race car engines where we polished the ports back in the 70's. I remember later reading research that found exactly what you were saying plus that the polished surface also caused unwanted droplets to accumulate on the port walls. I always try to be sensitive to the views of others and wouldn't dream of suggesting someone else is wrong. Once that starts on a forum friendly interaction ceases and people won't post for fear of being shown up. Is not the purpose of a forum to encourage and hopefully help like minded enthusiasts simply through chatting or are we now required to have a degree in engineering before offering comment? I shall refrain from saying more.
thanks carl the droplets is what peel said also -jim
 
Forgive me for not reading this whole thread. One comment I would make is DO NOT throw any original parts into the trash! Having repaired a 1965 GTO to restomod status, I can easily recall how some current remade items are nowhere close to the quality of original parts, and they cost a lot of money (especially if no replacement is being reproduced). So keep the old original stuff to go with the bike if you ever part with it, or just pass them along to someone intending to 'restore' one. Good Luck and enjoy !
 
Forgive me for not reading this whole thread. One comment I would make is DO NOT throw any original parts into the trash! Having repaired a 1965 GTO to restomod status, I can easily recall how some current remade items are nowhere close to the quality of original parts, and they cost a lot of money (especially if no replacement is being reproduced). So keep the old original stuff to go with the bike if you ever part with it, or just pass them along to someone intending to 'restore' one. Good Luck and enjoy !
I agree with you 100%. Good post. TUP
 
Forgive me for not reading this whole thread. One comment I would make is DO NOT throw any original parts into the trash! Having repaired a 1965 GTO to restomod status, I can easily recall how some current remade items are nowhere close to the quality of original parts, and they cost a lot of money (especially if no replacement is being reproduced). So keep the old original stuff to go with the bike if you ever part with it, or just pass them along to someone intending to 'restore' one. Good Luck and enjoy !

I agree with you 100%. I’m saving everything that’s useable.
 
just a thought to pass along , be sure to not put the sludge trap plug in too far ,so as to not cover up the oil passage that is just in front of the plug , if the plug is even with the crank you are fine , use blue Loctite good luck
DON'T ASK HOW I KNOW THIS IS GREAT ADVICE!

(I learned the HARD way, long distance, at the mercy of a 3rd party shop doing warranty repair for me)
 
Long time no chat fellas! Lots of things going on in life (crunch time for wedding things). Production has not slowed. However posting has. But fear not. Im
Back with more pictures. I have decided to not bobber it. I don’t know about going back to exact standard, But the overall look will remain. Sludge trap is in. Plug is in. (Don’t worry. I noticed that oil passages under the plug, what a risky design that is). I replaced all bearings. The big ends. New rings. Pistons were in great shape. After I cleaned them up a bit. The rings just snapped as the first touch. It’s all together. Top end is in. (Almost forgot to put the pushrods back in before torquing the rocker boxes). Engine is in the frame! You’ll notice the transmission isn’t installed yet. That’s because I had to order a new push rod. Waiting on that. Boyer ignition came in last week as well as new plug wires.
Engine aside. I gave the frame A good inspections. No cracks, not damage. Gave it a fresh coat before remounting the engine. I will get it all wired up just enough to get it started and make sure it runs. Then I’ll begin the complete rewire. And clean up all other components.
Concerning the Boyer ignition. Should I be running 2 6v coils with it? I’ve read mixed opinions. Some say 6v isn’t necessary for non racing I just want what’s necessary for the bike to run happy.
 

Attachments

  • 09A01FA4-528F-4023-B9F3-69D8216371A4.jpeg
    09A01FA4-528F-4023-B9F3-69D8216371A4.jpeg
    355.6 KB · Views: 24
  • C8AF6ADE-9567-4FDB-8CE4-EBF0255A1162.jpeg
    C8AF6ADE-9567-4FDB-8CE4-EBF0255A1162.jpeg
    136.8 KB · Views: 22
  • E0991B67-B715-476A-91C1-FF51694EFF67.jpeg
    E0991B67-B715-476A-91C1-FF51694EFF67.jpeg
    138 KB · Views: 14
  • 094EA269-7DD2-42DE-B6C2-7618AFF8682E.jpeg
    094EA269-7DD2-42DE-B6C2-7618AFF8682E.jpeg
    153.8 KB · Views: 17
Long time no chat fellas! Lots of things going on in life (crunch time for wedding things). Production has not slowed. However posting has. But fear not. Im
Back with more pictures. I have decided to not bobber it. I don’t know about going back to exact standard, But the overall look will remain. Sludge trap is in. Plug is in. (Don’t worry. I noticed that oil passages under the plug, what a risky design that is). I replaced all bearings. The big ends. New rings. Pistons were in great shape. After I cleaned them up a bit. The rings just snapped as the first touch. It’s all together. Top end is in. (Almost forgot to put the pushrods back in before torquing the rocker boxes). Engine is in the frame! You’ll notice the transmission isn’t installed yet. That’s because I had to order a new push rod. Waiting on that. Boyer ignition came in last week as well as new plug wires.
Engine aside. I gave the frame A good inspections. No cracks, not damage. Gave it a fresh coat before remounting the engine. I will get it all wired up just enough to get it started and make sure it runs. Then I’ll begin the complete rewire. And clean up all other components.
Concerning the Boyer ignition. Should I be running 2 6v coils with it? I’ve read mixed opinions. Some say 6v isn’t necessary for non racing I just want what’s necessary for the bike to run happy.
Congratulations you are well on the way. Surprising how quickly it will go back together now that you have completed the engine. Good time to check/replace the swing arm bushes if you haven't already and renovate the front forks. I covered doing both these jobs to my bike on this forum a little while ago if you need any pointers. Good luck.
 
Boyer ignition. Should I be running 2 6v coils with it?
Assuming the ignition you've bought is either a "Micro-Mk.4" (black "Transistor Box") or "MicroDigital" (red Transistor Box), from the fitting instructions:-

General Data
4) For low compression engines, two 12 volt coils (4 Ohm Resistance) in series are satisfactory, but for racing and high compression engines two 6 volt coils (2 Ohm resistance) in series, or one 12 volt 3.5 ohm or more primary winding resistance dual output coil will give the best results.
... at 9:1 compressing, your bike's engine is not "low compression" ...

. All wiring diagrams show "6V" coils.

Two single-HT-lead coils are easiest to mount using standard parts and positions.

Nevertheless, some other dubious instructions you should ignore. Assuming standard T100C 'positive ground':-

. The Boyer-Bransden "Transistor Box" Red wire should only ever be connected directly to the battery +ve terminal, never to the frame or any other part of the bike.

. Similarly, the "+" terminal of the second coil in the series (confusingly-labelled "IGNITION COIL 1" in the Micro-Mk.4 instructions) should be connected either also directly to the battery +ve terminal or at least into the standard Red wires' network; again, it should never be connected to some random bike part.

Then I’ll begin the complete rewire.
Have you read the PM (aka "conversation" in this Forum's jargon) I wrote for you? Amongst the advice is a simplified Red (or Black if 'negative ground') wires' network, including a specific connection between engine and whichever battery 'ground' terminal. If you're using standard 6V single-HT-lead coils, that plus the coils' series connection will ensure a robust and long-time trouble-free HT circuit.

transmission isn’t installed yet. That’s because I had to order a new push rod. Waiting on that.
Your pictures appear to show both gearbox and primary drive installed? If by "transmission", you mean the gearbox outer cover, you can install that. The pushrod works through the mainshaft in the adjuster stud in the clutch pressure plate therefore, by definition, it can be installed through the pressure plate.

Finally here, just curious but, while you've titled your thread "1971 T100c", your pictures don't show the '71 dipstick in the gearbox inner cover but do show the earlier slotted gearbox filler? Does your bike's engine (and frame?) VIN have an "E" or a "D" for the second letter of the date code?
 
A question that is absolutely nothing to do with this thread but I picked up on something someone said previously that seemed to suggest you guys can only buy fuel with a % of Ethanol included. Is this correct and you can't buy straight petrol anymore? I now run 98 octane unleaded fuel in my 67 Bonneville and it really seems to like it. 91 is the standard unleaded here, then its 94 octane with 10% Ethanol (E10).
The straight 95 octane unleaded would probably be ok in the Triumph, but what the heck, it's only money.
Answers please on a postcard.
 
Most of our petrol in the US is at least 10% ethanol. However, one can find non-ethanol petrol at some service stations. Marine petrol, aviation petrol, and racing petrol are all non-ethanol. I use racing petrol in my '68 Trophy. I use non-ethanol petrol in all of my small engines and in my Tiger.
 
im in upstate ny, we have non ethanol available but you have to look for it, the places near lake Ontario are more likely to carry because it sells good because of the boaters. also while im close to that subject I have been buying the amal premire carbs over the last few years , last month I said to myself why am I doing that I never burn that garbage. I have had some problems with the premire floats in the carbs and took them out and replaced them with the old style , problem solved, the newer premires have a flimsy hinge set up and the old ones are one piece no adjustment . and they are cheaper.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top