• 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
Tips
Tips

Post-War Other Bought a Herald

Share this page

M

mike crane

Member
Offline
Recently bought a Herald 1200 to keep my TR6 company. Looking to reduce the positive camber on the rear. Joe Curry used to sell a camber compensator for the swing axle TRs. Have not been able to contact him. Anybody know how to get hold of him or know of a similar kit? Canley Classics has a kit that upgrades the rear to a pivoting spring ala the Spitfire MKIV but it is more complicated to install as well as much more expensive. Any help is appreciated.
Thanks
Mike Crane
 
If you go to Joe's International Triumph Spitfire Database page and scroll down the page, on the left you'll see a heading of "Spit Stuff For Sale"; "camber compensators" is the first link.

Camber compensators are great. So is a bit of dearching of the rear spring if you've got a good spring shop in your area. Another possibility is a spacer to fit between spring and diff.; Canley Classics in the UK sells these in .5, .75 and 1" thicknesses. Top this off with a set of Konis all around and you're set to startle a few Spitfire owners!

Meanwhile, tell me more about the Herald, please!
 
Pictures? Enjoy the new toy.
I put KYB shocks on my herald and at least for the short time that the engine ran prior to blowing up, they were pretty good. MUCH cheaper than Koni's but NOT adjustable even though they are called "gas-a-djust" which would lead one to believe that there is something which could be adjusted.
 
You need to either have the rear spring re-arched or go ahead with the swing spring conversion. I would do the latter.
 
There's nothing wrong with a swing-spring conversion, but keep in mind that you can't simply cannibalize a tired square-tail Spitfire for everything. Yes, its fatter front sway bar (absolutely necessary) will be the same, but its swing-spring itself is NOT. (Besides, a used Spitfire swing-spring is likely already to be worn out.) You might be able to get by with the "heavy duty" rear spring that some of the US vendors sell (or possibly the CORRECT swing-spring for a late GT6 Mk3), but I can't vouch for that. And most new springs don't come with the "rocker box"; you might need to source that separately. The beauty (and expense) of the Canley Classics kit is that it includes EVERYTHING needed -- all brand-new and ready to bolt on.

Meanwhile, the beauty of a camber compensator is that it basically bolts right on without having to change any other parts, is proven over many, many years and has essentially the same net effect of greatly reducing the tuck-under of a rear wheel.

But I think, *IF* I were to do anything at all, I would still look into possibly some dearching of the existing spring and/or some lowering (via spacer block from CC) before doing anything else. Truth is, I've driven a number of Heralds over the years and have yet to find myself in any danger due to the supposedly horribly deficient swing-axle suspension. I don't deny that there can be problems, but one has to push the car to pretty high limits to experience such problems.
 
70herald said:
but NOT adjustable even though they are called "gas-a-djust" which would lead one to believe that there is something which could be adjusted.
Click to expand...
Right. The theory was that the valving was non-linear, so the shock gives more resistance when you try to move it faster (hence acts like a stiffer shock on a rough road than on a smooth road). Thus the shock "self-adjusted" to road conditions. Bilstein (and others) offer the same feature but of course have to make up other names to call it.
 
OK I had to read this thread again. Too much POSITIVE camber. aha. I read that as too much NEGATIVE camber. I've never seen too much positive on the rear of a Triumph. Sounds like the spring may have already been replaced or re-arched. A lower block would help.
 
Thanks for the feedback. I may have erred as to whether I have positive or negative camber. What I have is a tuck-in of the rear tires when the vehicle is at rest. My goal is to have the rear tires as close to vertical (zero camber) as possible when at rest. The spacer approach sounds like the easiest. While I am at it does anyone know if the tranny cover is shared with Spitfires. Moss-Europe's catalog lists the same number for the Herald and Spit. The cover in it is kind of ratty. I will attempt to post a picture soon. When I do I'll go into detail on the various modifications that have been made.
Mike Crane
 
Mike, there are two slightly different gearbox covers for Heralds. The early Herald (948cc and pre-GA80001 1200 models) share a cover with the Spitfire. Later Heralds share a cover with the GT6, except that the shifter hole is further forward on the Herald. Key here is the shape of the bottom of the cover on the RH side: the later covers "bulge out" a bit towards the front of the car on the RH side to clear the starter on GT6/Vitesse installations. (That's not the case on the later Heralds, but the body structure, and hence the shape of the floor pans, is shared between Herald and Vitesse.)

Looking forward to hearing about the "modifications that have been made"! /bcforum/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif
 
Andy
Commission# is GB23608LCV. Year of manufacture is 1963. I am going to guess it would be an early Herald 1200. The top of the cardboard cover has a squarish structure-possibly a change tray. The chap I bought it from installed a single 40DCOE weber and tubular header from a Spitfire. It has upgraded Spit front discs and an Ansa exhaust. He had begun installing Spit guages into a custom made dash. I have been sorting out the wiring with some success. New paint and Sunfast top. Bright red with KN
 
Congratulations Mike.Saving one of these special vehicles
is saving history(AKA The History Channel)No need to keep it original inside the skin just so it looks British outside.Original inside & out would be nice but personalizing it is ok to.And most importantly HAVE FUN DOING IT....Ken
 
mike crane said:
The top of the cardboard cover has a squarish structure-possibly a change tray.
Click to expand...

I've wondered what the heck is that 'change tray' depression is for on the gearbox cover.
 
mike crane said:
Andy
Commission# is GB23608LCV. Year of manufacture is 1963. I am going to guess it would be an early Herald 1200.
Click to expand...
Interesting that it is titled as a 1963, since -- going by that commission number -- it would have built in the latter months of 1964! That makes it what we Herald anoraks call a "Mk11" 1200. The main distinction is that it has the later, beefier chassis shared with the Vitesse 6/Sports 6. That's a very good thing, given the engine modifications described below.
mike crane said:
The top of the cardboard cover has a squarish structure-possibly a change tray.
Click to expand...
Yes, that's pretty much exactly what it is!
mike crane said:
The chap I bought it from installed a single 40DCOE weber and tubular header from a Spitfire. It has upgraded Spit front discs and an Ansa exhaust. He had begun installing Spit guages into a custom made dash. I have been sorting out the wiring with some success. New paint and Sunfast top. Bright red with KN
Click to expand...
Sounds nice all around. Do the Spit gauges include tachometer? If so, is there a tach-drive distributor (likely Delco) on the engine, which might actually be a Spitfire engine (hint: what's the engine number?). With those engine mods and the wheels, it's definitely worth looking into some suspension improvements in the rear. This is the great part about the later Heralds is that the chassis is capable of handling just about anything you'd be likely to do with a Spitfire in terms of significant power increases, adding an OD gearbox and improving the handling (only the last of which is most easily and safely done with the earlier chassis).
 
Andy
my computer froze up on my last post. To finish the last sentence it has KN mini-lite alloy rims. I replaced the points with Pertronix. Engine number is GD25507HE. The previous owner installed a Delco D200 distributor from a Spitfire. Instruments do include a tach. The Weber looks impressive but for ease of tuning I would prefer SUs. Lots of small winter projects courtesy of a Herald. I am sure I'll be buggin the heck out of the Herald owners on the BCF forum.
Thanks
Mike Crane
'71 TR6 '63(?) Herald 1200
 
Bug away, Mike! /bcforum/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif

Engine number sounds original, being the later 1200 Herald engine, bottom end of which is essentially identical (including camshaft) to a "Mk1" Spitfire. If that Weber works, great. But I agree that the SUs might be better overall. SUs and both intake and exhaust manifolds from a Spitfire 4 or Mk2 will bolt right up. Heads differ slightly between Herald and Spitfire (primarily in compression ratio and in valve size and no. of springs on each), but you're pretty close to Spitfire spec. either way.
 
Back
Top