Hey - did you know if you click on the title of a thread it will take you to the first unread post since you last visited that thread?
but were afraid to ask: 
STOP!! Never post your email address in open forums. Bots can "harvest" your email! If you must share your email use a Private Message or use the 
smilie in place of the real @
Pretty Please - add it to our Events forum(s) and add to the calendar! >> 
I have owned this 1967 BJ8 (HBJ8L / 41139) since November 1969. Sorry to say it has not always had the best of care or attention. Now I am replacing the outriggers and floor pans and have a question about the outsides side sill to outside side sill dimensions at the front and rear outriggers. Are these dimensions sacred? The factory workshop manual lists the dimensions as 48 ¾ +/- 1/16 and 51 ½ +/- 1/16. The rear dimension on my Healey seems be ok, however, the front dimension seems to be 1/4 to 3/8 inch wider. When I try to pull the front sills in to conform to the stated dimension, the slanted part of the footwell distorts. Before beginning this project the seams at the doors were equal and approximately 0.2 inch. I am curious if anyone else has run into this situation or if anyone could give advice.
-
Hi Guest!
If you appreciate British Car Forum and our 25 years of supporting British car enthusiasts with technical and anicdotal information, collected from our thousands of great members, please support us with a low-cost subscription. You can become a supporting member for less than the dues of most car clubs.
There are some perks with a member upgrade!**Upgrade Now**
(PS: Subscribers don't see this gawd-aweful banner
BJ8 frame,sill dimension.
- Thread starter Bob_W
- Start date
Share this page
JamesWilson
Yoda
Offline
[ QUOTE ]
The rear dimension on my Healey seems be ok, however, the front dimension seems to be 1/4 to 3/8 inch wider.
[/ QUOTE ]
I'm not surprized. I compared several measurements on mine (and other people's) to the specifications and found many discrepancies- not least, being my scuttle was not squarely mounted. If you're sure of the exisitng measurements I'd suggest they are far better than specifications that seemed to be applied in a very hit-or-miss fashion.
For example: I found two different approaches to attaching the inner sills to the outriggers:
https://www.britishcarforum.com/ubbthread...;page=40#126962
so minor differences in measurements aren't surprizing.
I'd say go with the original dimensions from your car, particularly since trying to force it to conform distorts other panels....
The rear dimension on my Healey seems be ok, however, the front dimension seems to be 1/4 to 3/8 inch wider.
[/ QUOTE ]
I'm not surprized. I compared several measurements on mine (and other people's) to the specifications and found many discrepancies- not least, being my scuttle was not squarely mounted. If you're sure of the exisitng measurements I'd suggest they are far better than specifications that seemed to be applied in a very hit-or-miss fashion.
For example: I found two different approaches to attaching the inner sills to the outriggers:
https://www.britishcarforum.com/ubbthread...;page=40#126962
so minor differences in measurements aren't surprizing.
I'd say go with the original dimensions from your car, particularly since trying to force it to conform distorts other panels....