100-6 galley head engine - Do I feel lucky?

[blueskies]

This early 100-6 has not been on the road for forty or more years. It came with a couple of engines, including an early galley head engine - correct for the car's serial number. The former owner told me that someone had rebuilt the engine thirty years ago, or it could have been forty years ago, and never run it. It sat indoors, on the floor of a garage or barn, all these years. With the restoration moving along, it's time to start thinking about the drive train for this car.

Today, I began to check out the engine. The crankcase had oil in it, not quite up to the add mark on the dip stick. The oil looked very clean.

The valve cover came off easily, with no valve cover gasket in place. Everything looks fairly good under the valve cover, although a couple of the springs and spring caps had a little surface rust. Most did not look rusty at all. The pushrods, what I could see of them, and all the other parts there appeared free of rust. I poured about two liters of oil on everything and let it slowly seep down along the push rods, towards the cam shaft, etc.

The spark plugs were only finger tight and look new, except for dirt on their exterior. There was no rust on the ends of the plugs or on the threads, which gave me hope that the inside of the cylinders might not be rusty. I then squirted lots of oil into each cylinder before trying to turn the engine.

The inside of the distributor looks fine, with no rust visible. It looks as if someone redid the wiring in there. The carburetor parts and linkages move freely.

After giving the oil a bit of time to soak in, using a big socket on the front end of the crankshaft, I tried turning the engine. It turned with little resistance. Before turning it very far, I added more oil from the top and through the spark plug holes, and kept on repeating that procedure. The valve train moves up and down as it should, and the rotor in the distributor turns.

If you are still with me, now for the question(s).

Given the cost of rebuilding these Healey engines, what would you do?

One could also tear the engine apart and check all the parts. Even if all the moving parts are good, the engine would get new gaskets, and one would know better what one has.

Or one could put the engine on an engine stand, change the oil and oil filter, remove and clean the carburetors and air filters, and replace the fan belt and hoses. And then hit the starter and hope for the best.

Either way, the engine also would get new paint.

Here are a few pictures, complete with decades of accumulated dirt:

 

[Keith_M]

Based on the appearance of the engine, I would say that it has never been apart and never been to a machine shop. It's too dirty, and the starter is still attached as well as the coolant hoses. Looks more like someone just pulled it out of a car. I would doubt that someone rebuilt the engine and just didn't run it.

That said, I doubt that you could do too much damage by trying to start it.

Keith

 

[Guest]

"Rebuilt" might have just been rings, rods and mains (which I would do at a min plus valve springs and a lap.)

 

[Marvin Gruber]

Fire that puppy up! That Longbridge motor will probably run just fine. They are not the strongest running motors but they do run smooth.

marv

 

[Healey Nut]

Hook up a battery , spin it over and do a compression check/test . If that's all good give it some gas and fire it up .

 

[healeyblue]

starter is on the wrong side

 

[dougie]

Fire that bitc% up !

 

[blueskies]

starter is on the wrong side

What's with that, I wonder? Can one bolt the starter onto either side?

 

[healeyblue]

The adapter plate that bolts to the engine between the flywheel and engine could be flipped, putting the starter hole on the wrong side. The trans will not bolt up with it that way though.

 

[blueskies]

The adapter plate that bolts to the engine between the flywheel and engine could be flipped, putting the starter hole on the wrong side. The trans will not bolt up with it that way though.

Thanks for the info. That might be another bit of evidence that someone took this engine apart and put it back together since it last ran. On the other hand, I'm now wondering what else they assembled backwards.

 

[Dandare]

Deleted

Danny

 

[Dandare]

The Austin saloons (sedans) of this period that used the 2639cc C-series engine have this orientation of backplate and starter motor and, of course, the bellhousing to suit. Could it be that this is not a Healey block?

Danny

 

[vette]

Take it apart. there are too many unknowns. steam it down, take it apart, mike the clearances everything might be good. you may not have to buy very much new to put it back together but then you know what you have and it will be clean, gasketed, and painted. you'll feel much more comfortable each time you drive it knowing the engine is alright. Without that cardinal knowledge you'll always wonder if it is going to give you trouble at some point. And then you may not take it the distance or enjoy it as much. Dave.

 

[healeyblue]

The Austin saloons (sedans) of this period that used the 2639cc C-series engine have this orientation of backplate and starter motor and, of course, the bellhousing to suit. Could it be that this is not a Healey block?

Danny

He stated that the engine matched the chassis number of the car (as all longbridge cars should) so it should be the proper healey engine.

 

[Dandare]

I don't think the backplate can be bolted up the wrong way round? (ie: flipped)?

Danny

 

[blueskies]

He stated that the engine matched the chassis number of the car (as all longbridge cars should) so it should be the proper healey engine.

healeyblue - sorry if I gave that impression. I used the word "correct," by which I meant that the engine is the correct gallery head style for that early BN4. The engine number plate is missing from the engine. So I suppose this could be an engine from an Austin.

Can anyone tell me what other external or internal differences there were between the C3 engines used in the Austins and the Austin Healeys? A quick search on the internet turned up one post where someone switched an Austin block into an Austin Healey that had a bad block. They claimed that all the internal moving parts were interchangeable, although the Austin may have had dished pistons to accommodate a turbocharger.

It appears to have the Telcalemit style oil filter, as opposed to the very early BN4 Vokes style. I wonder at what vehicle serial number that change took place?

I also have two spare later Healey engines, but it would be nice to have the "correct" engine in the car.

 

[Randy Forbes]

healeyblue - sorry if I gave that impression. I used the word "correct," by which I meant that the engine is the correct gallery head style for that early BN4. The engine number plate is missing from the engine. So I suppose this could be an engine from an Austin.

Can anyone tell me what other external or internal differences there were between the C3 engines used in the Austins and the Austin Healeys? A quick search on the internet turned up one post where someone switched an Austin block into an Austin Healey that had a bad block. They claimed that all the internal moving parts were interchangeable, although the Austin may have had dished pistons to accommodate a turbocharger.

It appears to have the Telcalemit style oil filter, as opposed to the very early BN4 Vokes style. I wonder at what vehicle serial number that change took place?

I also have two spare later Healey engines, but it would be nice to have the "correct" engine in the car.

I suppose one (1) way would be the mechanical fuel pump provision; does it have the correct-looking block-off plate (assuming the pump isn't still fitted__which would be a dead-giveaway). If so, when you remove the block-off plate, are there signs of wear on the eccentric of the camshaft?

There may be other, simpler ways, like numbers/markings cast into the block/head, but if I ever knew them, I don't remember any now...

 

[blueskies]

I now have looked for casting numbers on the block and head. The block casting number is AEC 335 and the head casting number is AEC 666. That block casting number is the correct number for the early 100-6 cars such as this one, and the head casting number is correct for cars with engine numbers after #30000. According to the heritage certificate, the engine number for this car is after 30000.

Based on the casting numbers, it seems that both the block and head are "correct" for this car. So I probably will keep going with this one for now.

 

[healeyblue]

Pull the flywheel and see if the plate can be flipped to put the starter on the correct side. If not it will do you no good as the trans. wont bolt up.

 

[Keith_M]

If this is really the correct engine for this car, and the backplate is really on backwards, I wouldn't be so tempted to try and start it. If the person who "rebuilt" it could get the backplate on backwards, who knows what else they did wrong.