• 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

Reproduction Parts Revisited

Share this page

Yes, I understand supply and demand and all the other business aspects involved.
But, I estimate that I travelled about 10,000 miles with that water pump. I also remember something about diminishing return.
 
Then maybe you got your moneys worth. But my 1958 TR3A still has the original (as far as I can tell) water pump.
 
I picked up a brand new Water pump on E-bay recently Quinton Hazel brand. Of course it is stamped 8-Oct-1975. It also happened to be a REALLY good deal. On the other hand, since I am waited no longer patiently for some Lego bits I bought on fleabay, I very well understand that it is a bit of a gamble.

A different option would be to go with one of those fancy, expensive Al alloy upgraded water pumps like British frame & engine sells. Not cheap but then the quality is likely to be very high.

I think part of our problem is that allot of our cars are racing, or being significantly upgraded, and for those applications, very high quality parts are available, but at "special" price. As a result, "normal" priced parts are being squeeze in two directions.

One other thought, a local shop here told me that he could get ANY water pump rebuilt, even if they weren't really meant to be rebuilt. Might be worth holding onto those old cores.
 
My TR is a hodge podge car put together from pieces
from several cars of various models and years.

I have a 1968 TR250 engine block, TR6 carbs, TR6 dizzy,
TR4A tranny, etc. I need a new water pump, among many other
parts. How do I determine the correct water pump to order?

thanks

d
 
Dale: My recollection is that the 250 and all of the 6's used the same pump. Better check though. My memory tends to me like me - - rather short.
 
Dale,
As I understand, some of the early cars used the older style pump which had a pulley for a 3/8" belt. Which would indicate if the pulley on your crank is for a 1/2" belt use the later style pump, if it is for a 3/8" belt use the older style pump.
 
70herald said:
One other thought, a local shop here told me that he could get ANY water pump rebuilt, even if they weren't really meant to be rebuilt. Might be worth holding onto those old cores.
Click to expand...

With some careful hydraulic press work and a good bearing supplier, most can be redone as long as the housing is not corroded or damaged.
 
DrEntropy said:
With some careful hydraulic press work and a good bearing supplier, most can be redone as long as the housing is not corroded or damaged.
Click to expand...

I easily disassembled my original pump with my arbor press. I did take pictures while doing it and if I can find replacements for the seal and bearing/shaft I will post a "how -to-rebuild" sequence with pictures.

If anyone knows where to obtain these parts it will help get this done much quicker.

Thanks
 
I'm a BIG fan of rebuilding the original componenets if possible. While British cars have always had a reputation for unreliability, these third-world sourced parts are far less reliable than even the Prince of Darkness would have supplied.
 
I got the aluminum racing one from England. Higher flow and quality, reliability are superb.


It is currently on it's 2nd 6. Only concern you need is pulley belt size and if it's one of the weird ones with two sheaves on the pulley(but there weren't that many of those sold).
 
If you have problems identifying the pulley as 3/8" or 1/2", the later water pumps(1/2") had a double pulley while the earlier ones were single pulley.
 
Good luck with "no more junk". Quality is where you find it and price is no guarantee of quality or junk. OEM's for heater valves, brake master cylinders, clutch masters and slaves, head light switches, etc. etc, must have continued making parts but under new names! Guess I am a little cynical about the new parts not having quality, but many parts on the TR6 did not have any quality to begin with.
 
"but many parts on the TR6 did not have any quality
to begin with. "

So it would appear the unreliability of my TR6
is not outside of the curve of originality.

That's kinda depressing.

d
 
I don't feel the quality was bad, maybe in some cases it was more the design.
When you can restore a car 30 years and 120,000 miles after the fact and use a lot of the parts besides the structural stuff as I was able to do, I'd say the quality wasn't too bad.
I have a lot of original rubber pieces that look better than the new repros today.
Lucas always got the bad rap, but 99% of that was corrosion.
Rust was a problem for all manufacturers from the '80's back. It still is today, but they are getting better.
The people at Triumph, MG, Jaguar, Austin Healey, and for that matter, Ford, GM, etc. never dreamed we would be resurrecting these things all these years later.
Everything was built with economy in mind. Did any of the British builders ever really flourish?
We should feel fortunate enough of the cars survived to create a market for parts. But it's no too much to ask for dependable pieces that will last for a reasonable amount of time. That water pump of mine lists for $90.00 and I found out today at TRF that the shaft shearing has happened to others. So this wasn't a freak occurance. For the price, the part should last for far more than 10,000 miles. I will be rounding up my old water pumps for rebuilding.
Years ago, Peter Egan wrote an article in R&T about a trip from Wisconsin to LA in a Model A. Every breakdown along the way was caused by reproduction parts.
It continues today.....
 
I feel that junk parts make junk cars. I have no use for a car I don't want to drive further than I want to walk back!

I expect at least reliable parts if nothing else than for safety reasons. I do not accept any excuses for less.

Today I did something about this. I searched out replacement parts for these water pumps. I have found three manufacturers of bearing shafts. I also have contacted several manufacturers of seals. And I contacted a large manufacturer of replacement water pumps. They did respond and said they are planning to manufacturer pumps for our cars also. So I will keep watch on them.

In short, if our more common sources do not provide what I need I will find another way to get it.
 
Tinster said:
"but many parts on the TR6 did not have any quality
to begin with. "

So it would appear the unreliability of my TR6
is not outside of the curve of originality.

That's kinda depressing.

d
Click to expand...

I disagree somewhat with this. These cars are basically '50s designs. The engine is based on an early 50s design which was expanded and more cylinders added..... The transmission is straight out of the late '40s. At the time, they were not overly expensive cars, and even worse since they were sporty, they were driven hard and most likely not maintained. Then we come along and want to compare them to the reliability of a modern vehicle.
Now if we are talking about a well maintained car, which was treated well over time, or properly restored, then the car should be reliable. Of course, we can't expect to just ignore our cars for 30,000 miles and expect things to keep running.

Dale, your car has almost finished a ground up restore at this point. I know it is hard to believe but you really are at the point were you just have to work out a few more little bugs and your car will be reliable.
 
Oh yea, I forgot the OEM for the TR6 clutch fork pin; reguardless of the reason for failure, design or material or assembly, it is just low quality.
 
70herald said:
I disagree somewhat with this. These cars are basically '50s designs. The engine is based on an early 50s design which was expanded and more cylinders added..... The transmission is straight out of the late '40s....
Click to expand...
Exactly! That "big six" started out as an 803cc four cylinder, long-stroke "8hp" ("taxable" rating) around 1953, and the gearbox was originally a three-speed, usually column-shifted unit from the circa 1947 Vanguard and, later, Triumph Mayflower.

(For now, I'll mostly ignore the wet liner four, designed originally for the Standard Vanguard "world car" application but almost immediately rethought in one direction for use in the Ferguson tractor and in the exact OPPOSITE direction a few years later for the TR sports series! Pretty amazing to me that one basic design served such a variety of applications, all of them rather successfully.)

Also keep in mind that engineering has advanced greatly in those intervening 60 years, as has metallurgy and machining (oh, and lubrication and a bunch of other things).

There are plenty of Triumphs out there that have seen multiple runs 'round the entire odometer; odds are their owners from new actually followed the maintenance recommendations. /bcforum/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/wink.gif
 
Back
Top