Replacement of Small Black Wire inside Distributor

[blueskies]

The engine on the Austin Healey 3000 would not fire and had no spark. After some poking around, I discovered that one of the small black wires inside the distributor was broken, inside the cloth cover where one could not see the break. This is the wire that connects to the inside of the terminal on the distributor that connects to the positive terminal on the coil. The wire is about two inches long. I just replaced the short wire with a PVC covered #18 copper wire and the car fired right up.

Now, my question is, was that original Healey wire something special? It and other wires that I have seen used in that location seem like unusually flexible wires. Or will a short chunk of modern multiple strand copper core wire work satisfactorily in that location in the long run? If not, where can one get some of that original style wire?

 

[DerekJ]

Yes the wire is something special. It is made of very fine strands of copper woven together. This provides the required flexibility and freedom of movement necessary due to the vibrations and movements inside the distributor. The car will work using any wire in an emergency but you should purchase the correct part for the long term.

 

[blueskies]

The engine in question is a late BJ7 or BJ8 engine. Can anyone tell me whether buying the points set from Moss or Victoria British would include this wire? Moss lists a separate part that they call a "terminal bush and lead" (153-640) that I suspect may be what I need. The Moss point set is 153-900. I see that Victoria British does not list the "terminal bush and lead," although they do have two different point sets listed for the late BJ7 engines - 8-220 and 8-0400. I wonder what the difference is, and whether either includes this wire and terminal assembly?

 

[BJ8Healeys]

Yes, the part you need is Moss 153-640 and you can buy it separately from the points set. The wire comes with the plastic terminal block attached. As DerekJ says, a normal wire will work to get you home in an emergency, but it wouldn't last long due to the movement of the distributor plate causing flexing that will lead to breaking of the wire. The correct wire is made to be very flexible.

If your engine is in (or from) a BJ8, then I would be interested in the serial number if it has one. If the engine is not original to your car, as the BJ8 Registrar I can find out which car it was original to. That might be the only clue to another BJ8 that no longer exists due to donating its parts. The engine serial number will begin with 29F it if is a BJ7 engine, 29K if a BJ8.

 

[Keoke]

A small gauge #24 AWG black insulated wire can be used to replace the grounding braid, just put a small "Z" bend in the piece and then solder it in place without disturbing the "Z". The "Z" will allow it to flex and work a treat.

 

[blueskies]

If your engine is in (or from) a BJ8, then I would be interested in the serial number if it has one. If the engine is not original to your car, as the BJ8 Registrar I can find out which car it was original to. That might be the only clue to another BJ8 that no longer exists due to donating its parts. The engine serial number will begin with 29F it if is a BJ7 engine, 29K if a BJ8.

Steve, That raises an interesting issue. The complete number on the plate on the engine, with an F prefix, matches that on the British Heritage Certificate for this car - a 1963 MKII. But the former owner of the car says that the engine block is a late BJ8 block. The reason he thinks that is because of the location of the dipstick. On this car, the dipstick is directly above the engine mount, instead of behind the engine mount. See attached picture.


Does this sound correct? Is this in fact a later engine? Can anyone tell me at what serial number or in what year the dipstick location moved forward to above the engine mount?

 

[DerekJ]

Yes. that is a BJ8 engine. (29K)

 

[BJ8Healeys]

Steve, That raises an interesting issue. The complete number on the plate on the engine, with an F prefix, matches that on the British Heritage Certificate for this car - a 1963 MKII. But the former owner of the car says that the engine block is a late BJ8 block. The reason he thinks that is because of the location of the dipstick. On this car, the dipstick is directly above the engine mount, instead of behind the engine mount. See attached picture.
View attachment 35572

Does this sound correct? Is this in fact a later engine? Can anyone tell me at what serial number or in what year the dipstick location moved forward to above the engine mount?

blueskies, that is a BJ8 engine. The dipstick was behind the engine mount from 29F engine /H101 to 29K engine /H278 (and for French-spec 29FF engines /H101 to /H164). For 29K engines above /H278 (and French-spec engines from 29KF /H101 and 29KFA /H224), the dipstick was above the engine mount. It would appear that someone has removed the serial number plate from the BJ7 block and reinstalled it on a later 29K block. If you send me a photo of the serial plate, I can tell whether that has been done. The only reason to do that would be to suggest that the engine in the car is the original. That's why I object to serial number plates being recreated and installed on engines that are missing them because once the serial plate is gone, in most cases, there is absolutely no way to be sure the engine is the one that originally had that number.

 

[blueskies]

Steve, I will try to get a picture of the plate. With the engine assembled, it is a bit difficult to get a good shot of that area. The engine was recently rebuilt and does run nice, so it probably will stay in the car. With the broken distributor wire in the distributor replaced, the car now starts with just a short tap on the starter button.

I do have two spare engines for Healey 3000s with the dipstick in the correct location. They still have the engine number tags on them - one has a D prefix and one has an E prefix - but they have not run for many years and likely need to be rebuilt.

 

[BJ8Healeys]

blueskies, the 29D engine is from a 3000 Mk I (BN7/BT7) and the 29E is from a Mk II (BN7/BT7).
I know how difficult it is to get a good picture of the engine serial plate with the engine installed, but I appreciate the effort and it could provide some information we wouldn't have otherwise.

 

[blueskies]

Here you go. Does this tell you anything? The number is the same as on the British Heritage Certificate for the car, a later BJ7. The car was manufactured in June of 1963, but titled as a 1964 model.



It seems surprising that anyone would have gone to the trouble to switch engine tags. The person I bought the car from had it for about fifteen years, and he bought it as a project, with this engine in place, not running, needing rebuilding. When he bought the car, it was very nearly rust free, but otherwise rough and unrestored. I would not think that the car at that time had a value high enough to encourage fakery. Assuming that someone swapped tags, that likely occurred decades ago.

 

[Patrick67BJ8]

Here you go. Does this tell you anything? The number is the same as on the British Heritage Certificate for the car, a later BJ7. The car was manufactured in June of 1963, but titled as a 1964 model.

View attachment 35585

It seems surprising that anyone would have gone to the trouble to switch engine tags. The person I bought the car from had it for about fifteen years, and he bought it as a project, with this engine in place, not running, needing rebuilding. When he bought the car, it was very nearly rust free, but otherwise rough and unrestored. I would not think that the car at that time had a value high enough to encourage fakery. Assuming that someone swapped tags, that likely occurred decades ago.

Here's my original one for my '67.

 

[healeyblue]

The numbers and lettering don't look right to me. The sizing and spacing is inconsistent and some of it appears to be correctly reverse stamped, but other parts don't. It also looks awfully nice and clean compared to the rest of the block in that area.
Jim

 

[BJ8Healeys]

The engine serial number plate is an original plate. The lettering and spacing are typical, and sometimes plates are found with some numbers stamped into the plate from below while others are stamped from above. Another example is attached.

To me, this indicates that the basic serial number was stamped into the plate from below, while the rest of the number (for example, the part indicating whether the engine is to be mated with an overdrive gearbox and whether it is a low or high compression engine) was stamped at a later time from above. As with so much else in the factory processes, the way things were marked is not 100% consistent. It appears that there is no way to tell whether this BJ7 serial plate is original to the BJ8 block it is attached to. The last BJ7 engine serial number used was /H6188, so /H5386 is a relatively late BJ7 number. That leads to the possibility that production of BJ8 blocks was already underway and one could have been used for a BJ7 number, but that is just speculation. Production of these cars and installation of their serialized parts did not fall in strict numerical sequence. The first BJ8 got engine /H571, which has the longer dipstick of later cars, while the 9th, 10th, and 11th got the shorter dipstick of the BJ7s.

 

[blueskies]

The engine serial number plate is an original plate. The lettering and spacing are typical, and sometimes plates are found with some numbers stamped into the plate from below while others are stamped from above. Another example is attached.

To me, this indicates that the basic serial number was stamped into the plate from below, while the rest of the number (for example, the part indicating whether the engine is to be mated with an overdrive gearbox and whether it is a low or high compression engine) was stamped at a later time from above. As with so much else in the factory processes, the way things were marked is not 100% consistent. It appears that there is no way to tell whether this BJ7 serial plate is original to the BJ8 block it is attached to. The last BJ7 engine serial number used was /H6188, so /H5386 is a relatively late BJ7 number. That leads to the possibility that production of BJ8 blocks was already underway and one could have been used for a BJ7 number, but that is just speculation. Production of these cars and installation of their serialized parts did not fall in strict numerical sequence. The first BJ8 got engine /H571, which has the longer dipstick of later cars, while the 9th, 10th, and 11th got the shorter dipstick of the BJ7s.

Thank you for your reply. I realize that your comments about the possible originality of the engine to this car are speculation. Although I am far from being an expert in this area, the same thought had crossed my mind. Other manufacturers did similar things, mixing freshly cast and older parts on the same car. With GM products, major engine parts may have a manufacture date that differs from the manufacture date of the car by as much as six months.

In today's market, it would make sense for a less than ethical person doing a complete restoration of a car to swap tags from one engine to another. Restamped blocks and other faked parts have become a huge problem for collectors of many marques. But I have pictures of this car dating back to the 1990s. At that time, the car was a basket case, with rough looking, peeling paint. The engine was not running and needed rebuilding. Back when this car was last on the road, which could have been in the sixties or seventies, the car likely was worth only a few hundred dollars, and people were rarely concerned with originality.

Maybe someone else can shed light on this? If the factory really did install the new style engine in a late BJ7, they possibly did that with more than one car. Are there documented examples of this happening? This car was originally shipped to Chicago. It went to southern Oregon, near the California border. It came with Oregon title documents, with the names and addresses of two former owners. One could try to contact those persons; they might know more about whether an engine swap took place. (I suppose that it does not often snow in southern Oregon, and I hear that Oregon does not use salt on the roads; that might explain why this car had next to no rust in the usual spots.)

 

[Patrick67BJ8]

Thank you for your reply. I realize that your comments about the possible originality of the engine to this car are speculation. Although I am far from being an expert in this area, the same thought had crossed my mind. Other manufacturers did similar things, mixing freshly cast and older parts on the same car. With GM products, major engine parts may have a manufacture date that differs from the manufacture date of the car by as much as six months.

In today's market, it would make sense for a less than ethical person doing a complete restoration of a car to swap tags from one engine to another. Restamped blocks and other faked parts have become a huge problem for collectors of many marques. But I have pictures of this car dating back to the 1990s. At that time, the car was a basket case, with rough looking, peeling paint. The engine was not running and needed rebuilding. Back when this car was last on the road, which could have been in the sixties or seventies, the car likely was worth only a few hundred dollars, and people were rarely concerned with originality.

Maybe someone else can shed light on this? If the factory really did install the new style engine in a late BJ7, they possibly did that with more than one car. Are there documented examples of this happening? This car was originally shipped to Chicago. It went to southern Oregon, near the California border. It came with Oregon title documents, with the names and addresses of two former owners. One could try to contact those persons; they might know more about whether an engine swap took place. (I suppose that it does not often snow in southern Oregon, and I hear that Oregon does not use salt on the roads; that might explain why this car had next to no rust in the usual spots.)

I recall numbers inside the block that are stamped and appear to have a date of manufacturer by year and month only. I'd have to go and look at my spare block to confirm. (maybe later).