billy_anorak59

7 minutes ago, Jol Wilkinson said:

It think that expansion tanks don't normally have pressure caps. The feed to the tank looks like it is from the radiator overflow outlet.  So all that  the tank cap is doing is pressurising the tank and hose to the radiator. +

 

It looks that the top of the radiator is below the top hose into the engine so it may be that the expansion tanks stops air being drawn in to the radiator when cooling down. But it still should't need a pressure cap.

Hmm - Interesting that.

Taking a look at the Rimmer Brothers diagram as well as a photo of an actual Vitesse engine bay, it would appear that the expansion tank does need a cap, but the radiator iself does not:

A 'Specimin' engine:

Does that mean that my radiator is 'wrong', and can I effectively blank the radiator by having a cap that is just a cap, i.e. a 'solid' cap with no pressue release? Is there such a thing?

I do wonder what's going on here, as I was told that the whole engine/gearbox came from a crashed 1965 Vitesse (on the M6) - and I 'presumed' (I know - never presume) that the cooling system would have been from the same car, but it looks like it may have actually been replaced.

Thanks for making me look properly! More thinking needed...(apologies if none of this is interesting to other folk - it wasn't my intention to hijack the thread)

Thanks to all that have answered.

On 25/05/2023 at 17:20, doilum said:

The header tank was probably installed as the radiator had to be positioned lower than originally intended. This would make bleeding airlocks almost impossible. Having almost completed a Rochdale GT in the 1990s I have some familiarity with the subject but don't quite recognise the body. Pity that Mr Filby never got round to publishing volume one of British Kit Cars.

Thanks @doilum - the header tank is a standard fitting on the Vitesse 6, and comparing the complete installation against 'normal' vitesse's, the radiator seems no lower on my car. I think it has had cooling problems in the past though, as  a big ugly ‘scoop’ has been grafted on the bonnet, in an attempt to get more air through.

Even amongst the obscure subjects of the period, this one is pretty obscure, so I’m not surprised you didn’t recognise it!

It’s an ‘Autobodies Mk2’ (Autobodies were based in Oldham), which would have started life with a ‘GT’ body, but mine had it’s roof chopped off (shame really, I think I prefer the original)

Advert:

Original Publicity Photo:

Mine (as you can imagine, it took some tracking down as to what it actually was/is!) :

On 29/05/2023 at 09:49, Jol Wilkinson said:

Radiator caps have a central "air valve" that allows air (or the coolant in the expansion tank in this case) to be drawn back in as the engine coolant cools down, to prevent a vacuum forming, thus damaging the radiator, etc. I suspect that is stuck in the cap on the expansion tank.

Thank you @Jol Wilkinson – I think that pretty much explains what is happening here. I’m not sure if the pressure caps for the radiator and header are, or should be different pressure ratings, but whatever, new ones will be found, and the right ones put on the right piece of equipment! Appreciate your reply.

Think you're right!

There are some on Ebay - for a price - but there's nothing to say that they don't leak either. However, beggers can't be choosers, so a gamble might be in order! 

Spitfire 4 tanks are the same (apparently)

Thanks for your reply @37114 – most appreciated.

Yes – the expansion tank and fittings as shown in the photo are standard for a Vitesse 6 motor.

For what it’s worth, I’ll expound my theory re: collapsed expansion tank, and people can put me right, as I’m sure some know better than I!

What I ‘think’ is happening is that the pressure cap on either the expansion tank is seized, or is the wrong rating, or the pressure cap on the radiator itself is wrong or seized, or both!

The engine heats up the water, anything that would have been pushed out is sent to the overflow/expansion tank (assuming the radiator pressure cap allows it). When the water cools again, the pressure cap does not admit air to allow the water to flow back to the radiator, and a vacuum is formed as the coolant contracts. As it’s a vacuum It might be that the rubber pipe connecting it was also flattened (rather than blown), but as it was nearly 30 years ago, I can’t remember that detail I’m afraid.

I think the solution will be to check the rating or operation of both pressure caps, but am open to ideas. Might be totally wrong!

How I ‘re-inflate’ the expansion tank is another matter – it might be scrap, unsoldering, beating out, and resoldering something like that is outside my expertise (such as it is).

Now that I’m approaching retirement, my thoughts are turning to get my old car up and running – it’s one of those late 50s/early 60s ‘specials’, where you turned your Ford Pop into a ‘sports car’ by junking the body and fitting a new, shiny GRP shell on it – a ‘kit car’ in modern parlance. This one is a bit different, as it sits on a 1951 Singer 4AD Roaster chassis, but with a Triumph Vitesse 6 (1600cc) engine. It will be a bit of a job, as it was last running in 1994 – and many things have conspired against it being on the road since then, but hopefully better days beckon.

Anyway – a question please? When I first got the car (1993), I managed to track down the original builder, who had some old photos and slides of the car, and I got some prints taken of them, but I neglected to ask the dates. From the two posted here, can anyone narrow down what dates they are likely to be please? I know they are taken in Scotland (one is the car leaving the Skye Ferry I believe, the other is at a remote hostelry somewhere), but there is a car in the garage behind on the pub one, (and I can’t make out the suffix of the reg no – an M? – that’s the trouble with taking a print off a slide, and scan of the print), and from the Skye Ferry one, might it be possible to narrow down the date from the cars and fashion of the people?

One other question that's bugging me (and I know this isn’t a forum for diagnosing car problems, but hey-ho - worth a try) is when the car was laid up, the expansion tank - this, circled:

…was found to be ‘squashed’ (for want of a better word) – almost as if it was sucked inward by a vacuum? I have my theory as to why, but would be interested to hear the views of those that know!

Re-commissioning will be ‘interesting’ – especially as the car was stored next door to my parents for many years, and my Dad (who was suffering from dementia) thought he would help (for whatever reason - they were perfectly OK) by dismantling the window winders on both sides, and then just left them! Bless him.

I’m not sure even now if I have all the parts (For information, they’re mid 50s Hillman Minx/Husky – not easy to get I suspect).

Anyway, I digress – any replies appreciated, cheers.

13 hours ago, The Johnster said:

Not the Severn Tunnel, Billy; the train was routed via Pontypool Road, Hereford, Malvern, and Worcester, so turned  left at Maindy Jc once it had crossed the river bridge at Newport.  Even had it run via Gloucester, in which case it would have passed through STJ, it would not have gone through the Severn Tunnel.  The tunnel you are confusing it with is Gaer Tunnel, just to the west of Newport High Street though the filming is done from the Cardiff end.

Glad you liked it @The Johnster and thanks for the correction - I just guessed I'm afraid and missed by mile! I'm not too familiar with the areas you (and others) descibe here on the thead, but I'm certainly finding out about the various locations and enjoying your writings as I learn where and how things were done.

Please keep the confessions coming as and when you can - it's all great stuff!

Thought of you and this thread @The Johnster when I came across a short YouTube vid that you might like:

Barry, Cadoxton, Pontypool Road and what looks like the Severn Tunnel. Plus the Hymeks - what's not to like!

On 14/03/2023 at 00:01, melmerby said:

There was a howler tonight when they mentioned the Turbomotive was wrecked in a crash and showed the mangled wreck of "Princess Anne"

No. The locomotive that was previously the Turbomotive was wrecked in the crash.

It was a double howler - I'm pretty sure that the mangled wreck they actually showed was of 'City of Glasgow' not 'Princess Anne'.

I can't contribute to interesting discussion here, but as a slight distraction, here's a photograph my Dad took (in 1953, I think) of HMS Duke of York laid up on the Gareloch (enlargement from a very small negative, hence the grain):

19 hours ago, Steven B said:

Anyone found photos others of a 120 being part of a hybrid unit with a 101 or 108?

Looks like one here, judging by the roof vents. I never saw one on this line, but here it is  - probably one of the 80s Chester allocation, and taken at Bromborough Station after I'd moved away from the area.

Back to black I hope; 18000 at Crewe Heritage centre c1994:

A couple of poor photos from me - sorry and all that - an instamatic was all I had at the time...

First off, 25195+25161 at Chester bringing in the Shrewsbury leg of the "Marches Venturer" railtour 7th October 1978. I think it was 'Clun Castle' that took over.

The rest are unidentified, but may be of interest to someone.

Unidentified 25 on Chester MPD at dusk along with 40075 and a DMU. May 1982.

An unidentified 25 trundles through Chester on what looks like a short engineers train. 7th October 1978.

Another unidentified one from a moving train at Manchester Victoria on 13th August 1977.

I always thought that the Mersey Railway station at Birkenhead Central would fit the bill nicely for this. Tunnels at both ends (along with an overbridge near one of them), terraced houses on one side, and a gas works on the other. Add in two maintenance sheds, a bay, small turntable, and to top it off so to speak, a large steam shed on top. It's on a gentle curve too.

Wouldn't have to be electrified either if set in a rule 1 world!

My photo c.1975 by which time one of the maintenace sheds (on the kick-back, foreground) had been demolished:

My old satnav used to regularly mention 'Pet-erb-er-oh', and I wondered what the hell it was on about, until I realised it was trying to say Peterborough.

Going back to the OP, it might be of interest that I asked about the pronounciation of clerestory 6 years or so ago (as well as 'bow' , as in 'bow-ended' carriages):

56 minutes ago, Michael Edge said:

This wasn't there on one side of the Eastbourne exhibition photos (which KR have copied) but it's not entirely clear whether the loco was even complete then.

I think at least one side had a 'sort of' cover over the exhausts - obviously quickly removed, as seen here at Marylebone:

Incidentally, that early picture previously posted was the one used on the 'brochure' for the locomotive - front and back covers here:

11 minutes ago, MarkC said:

I presume that everyone is aware of the (working) Fell gearbox model that is in the NRM? That's a beast in itself.

If it's any use, I posted a (not very good) photo here Mark:

https://www.rmweb.co.uk/topic/143781-fell-diesel-livery-information/page/2/#comment-3768801

10 hours ago, corsair said:

would you be kind enough to send a pic of the works plate please thank you 

Not a problem. Here you go:

@corsair Well done for looking into the possibility of a put right kit! However, don't forget there is a centre grille missing on the late black/green version too (where KR have a window).

PS: The icing on the cake would be the provision of a set of two builders plates too!! 🙂

(I can show a detailed picture of what these looked like if you want?)

...and if you want to know what it's innards looked like, try this Eagle Comic cutaway, showning the loco in original condition (click on linked photo to take you to Flickr):

Nothing to do with the KR model, but I thought this was an interesting photo I'd not seen before:

7 minutes ago, The Stationmaster said:

Here are the only two photos I can find online which really do show the two sides of the loco

Do the photos I posted here not definitively show both sides?: https://www.rmweb.co.uk/topic/149392-kr-models-announce-the-fell-in-oo-and-n/page/21/#comment-4524215