Original Dynamo?

[Tilleypops425]

Hi all

I'm back after far too long away.
Tilley has been dusted off washed and polished and is road ready once more well, not quite road ready.
I think the dynamo is broken as there is a rattling noise under the bonnet when driving her and the ignition light is staying on.
Tilley is a 1957 Morris Minor 100O. Could the dynamo be the original.one? or is it likely it would have been changed during the 69 years of her life?
I will attatch some photos. If it was the original I would have it reconditioned as I like to keep her originality as far as I can.
If not then reluctantly I will purchase a new one as reconditioning the one in her would be more expensive.
I would be grateful for your comments on my attached photo.

[svenedin]

I think that is a Lucas C40 whereas your '57 would have originally had a C39. It will have a date and model number on the outer case so you can find out definitively. Usually, when a dynamo went wrong it was replaced on an exchange basis so it is unusual to find an original still with the same car.

The main Minor parts suppliers are selling Far-East Lucas copies. Personally, I would recommend a refurbished original Lucas unit.

They are pretty simple inside. If your Minor has been sitting unused for a long time it is possible (and likely) that the bearings have dried out. One of the bearings is just a bush and can be oiled through the oil hole at the back of the dynamo. The front bearing is of the ball-bearing type and packed with grease but it is not accessible for lubrication from the outside.

Check the basics before deciding whether the dynamo needs overhaul or changing. For instance, make sure the fan belt is not slipping, that the electrical connections are clean and secure. If you search the forum you will find the testing procedure if you have a multimeter.

Not charging is not necessarily the dynamo. The dynamo may be fine and the problem is with the RB106 control box. Clean the contacts in the control box.

Stephen

[Tilleypops425]

Hello Stephen

I can't thank you enough for all of the valuable information in your email its hugely helpful to me.

I will work through your recommendations and see where we go from there.

Thanks again Stephen

Maddie.

[Tilleypops425]

Ps Im sure you are aware of this but original or reconditioned Dynamos,should that turn out to be an issue, are like hens teeth!

[philthehill]

The dynamo is not original as the original dynamo would have a removable sleeve which when moved gave access to the brushes. The dynamo fitted is the later type.

[svenedin]

Ps Im sure you are aware of this but original or reconditioned Dynamos,should that turn out to be an issue, are like hens teeth!

They are still not that difficult to find. There are various small business refurbishing dynamos and selling them on eBay but I can't make a specific recommendation. Or there are other business selling them or refurbishing them such as:

https://www.autoelectricsupplies.co.uk/ ... PuNT1NpIck

https://www.heritagerotating.co.uk/prod ... mo-family/

I'm sure there are others but that is a very quick search.

Just make sure it really is the dynamo that is faulty. The dynamo and the RB106 control box are part of the same system and if the RB106 is not working properly then the dynamo will not receive the power to its field coil ("F" connection) that it needs to make a magnetic field and then produce more electricity. Your '57 will have a control box that has wires clamped by terminal screws. These can come loose or corroded. The later RB106 (RB106/2) has spade terminals. There are 2x bobbins inside and both of them have contact breakers. These can become dirty or burnt and then the unit fails to work.


Stephen

[svenedin]

The dynamo is not original as the original dynamo would have a removable sleeve which when moved gave access to the brushes. The dynamo fitted is the later type.

That's the earlier starter motor isn't it Phil? The C39 has the felt pad oiler with a screw.

Stephen

[myoldjalopy]

I also do not think that it is the original, as earlier dynamos had nuts to connect the two wires, rather than push on connections.

[philthehill]

The dynamo fitted to my 1957 948cc Minor had the removable sleeve which gave access to the brushes. It did not have the felt and screw oiler.
As pointed out the 1957 dynamo had eyes on the ends of the electrical leads which are secured by nuts. The female terminal spade ends of the OPs dynamo are the after market crimped type so not original.
To sum up - the dynamo is a much later item and I would suggest fitted as a replacement for the original.

[geoberni]

People don't seem to have picked up on the word 'rattling'.
I wouldn't call bearings a rattling, but I would wonder about the integrity of the pulley wheel

Trawling through the Parts lists, the Dynamo went through quite a few BMC Part numbers. These basically are grouped into 803, 948 and 1098 engine fitment.

162626
3H 2744

11G 220
57H 5062
13H 133

13H 425
13H 219

By the end the part list defaults to saying all are unavailable except for 13H219 as replacement part.
You really have to be a bit of a sleuth to work it all out, as cross references to Lucas numbers are hard to find.
What I can say is that from the illustrations in the Parts manual, the final 2 numbers are the one with the narrow body section for the later Coil Clamp.

According to Ray Newell's 'original' book, the 39 PV/2 was continued over from the SII, but the Series II section makes no mention of it's introduction to replace the 39PV.

According to the Workshop Manual, the C40 Dynamo was introduced around the 355*** engine numbers

As far as I'm aware, the C39 had the strap for the brush window, and the C40 didn't.

The change from Nuts to Lucar connectors happened late 1959ish.

Just to illustrate how difficult it is to make sense of the Lucas part numbering system, these are 3 spare dynamos I have, brought as a job lot with some other parts.

20260518_114747.jpg (1006.37 KiB) Viewed 21851 times

All 3 are Type C40 and all have a Coil Mounting Clamp fitted.

From Left to Right they are by Part Number and Date of Manufacture:
22700L 6/67
22704H 10/63
22704A 2/63

So the most recent variant made in 1967, has a part number lower than the two made in 1963, thereby most likely indicating that the part number denoted an intention to fit a particular vehicle make/model, whereas the suffix letter would indicate a minor change in the manufacturing details.

The latter two do not have the reduced diameter section for the Clamp, only the 22700 has that
It has a strange single piece Bakelite Fan/Pulley assembly
But I have seen another Type C40 variant with the reduced diameter section, the 22715. I'm sure there's probably others out there.

Welcome to the wonderful world of Lucas Type Classification combined with variant numbering...

[geoberni]

Ps Im sure you are aware of this but original or reconditioned Dynamos,should that turn out to be an issue, are like hens teeth!

Really??
Reconditioned/refurbished C40 Dynamos are comparatively common, they're available on ebay and direct from some other places.
There may be a question as the the quality of the overhaul compared to 'original' refurbishment by Unipart or similar in the 1960s, but they are more available than hen's teeth.

[svenedin]

Ps Im sure you are aware of this but original or reconditioned Dynamos,should that turn out to be an issue, are like hens teeth!

Really??
Reconditioned/refurbished C40 Dynamos are comparatively common, they're available on ebay and direct from some other places.
There may be a question as the the quality of the overhaul compared to 'original' refurbishment by Unipart or similar in the 1960s, but they are more available than hen's teeth.

They are definitely available and I listed some links. They are not cheap though!

If all it needs is brushes then it would be far more cost effective to DIY. There are limits to what can be done at home though. To replace field coils for instance needs special tooling for the extremely tight pole shoe screws and of course a source of new field coils. The specialists re-wind them.

Stephen

[Tilleypops425]

Hi governing

I actually meant c39's the proper originals for my car I think in 1957.
But not sure whether someone said that mine would have probably had the later c40.
Tilley was registered in Feb 1957.

[Tilleypops425]

Apologies for predictive text should have read goeberni!!

[myoldjalopy]

Hi governing

I actually meant c39's the proper originals for my car I think in 1957.
But not sure whether someone said that mine would have probably had the later c40.
Tilley was registered in Feb 1957.

A 1957 would have originally had a C39.

[svenedin]

According to the East Sussex Minors website Lucas C39 1953-1962. I am not sure whether that is correct though. I thought the changeover to C40 was a bit earlier than that. They are available but not as readily available as the C40. The power output of the C40 is a bit higher than the C39, about 3 amps more. ( https://www.dynamoregulatorconversions. ... utputs.php)

Stephen

[myoldjalopy]

I think ESM are correct. I believe the C40 came with the new 1098cc models in Sept 1962.

[Tilleypops425]

geoberni.... third time lucky....

[Tilleypops425]

I just wanted to say that I've been overwhelmed by your responses to my 'dynamo conundrum'.
I think the breadth of your knowledge is awe-inspiring I love how technical the discussion has become it makes for fascinating reading.
Also, I have had my memory jogged. I actually have gathering dust on one of my bookshelves a rather old Haynes manual of the Morris Minor 1000 which ive just discovered has in it an A2 size poster of a lubrication chart for the Morris Minor 1000 and Series 11, this is in mint condition btw, Also on the shelf is a Haynes Purchase & DIY Restoration Morris Minor and Minor 1000 book I think my one was published in 1991 the final year of publication.and finally I have found another sweet little book entitled The Book of the Morris Minor 1000 second edition 1963 covering models upto January 1963.
So i will use the Haynes manual in conjunction with your advice and hopefully I can get to the bottom of the noise under the bonnet and the reason why the ignition light remains on.
I am a stickler for preserving the originality of my Morris Minor so much so that I'm loathe to even replace a nut or screw that appears to be original let alone a part from underneath the bonnet and that is why if forced to replace the current dynamo admittedly probably not the original from what you all have said I would love to put back in an original c39 most probably re-conditined. Tilley still retains her original trafficators they are just disconnected it would be great to have them working again.
Anyway armed with my trusty Hayned and all your excellent advice I will update you on my findings this weekend.

In the meantime I bid you goodnight.

Maddie.

[svenedin]

I just wanted to say that I've been overwhelmed by your responses to my 'dynamo conundrum'.
I think the breadth of your knowledge is awe-inspiring I love how technical the discussion has become it makes for fascinating reading.
Also, I have had my memory jogged. I actually have gathering dust on one of my bookshelves a rather old Haynes manual of the Morris Minor 1000 which ive just discovered has in it an A2 size poster of a lubrication chart for the Morris Minor 1000 and Series 11, this is in mint condition btw, Also on the shelf is a Haynes Purchase & DIY Restoration Morris Minor and Minor 1000 book I think my one was published in 1991 the final year of publication.and finally I have found another sweet little book entitled The Book of the Morris Minor 1000 second edition 1963 covering models upto January 1963.
So i will use the Haynes manual in conjunction with your advice and hopefully I can get to the bottom of the noise under the bonnet and the reason why the ignition light remains on.
I am a stickler for preserving the originality of my Morris Minor so much so that I'm loathe to even replace a nut or screw that appears to be original let alone a part from underneath the bonnet and that is why if forced to replace the current dynamo admittedly probably not the original from what you all have said I would love to put back in an original c39 most probably re-conditined. Tilley still retains her original trafficators they are just disconnected it would be great to have them working again.
Anyway armed with my trusty Hayned and all your excellent advice I will update you on my findings this weekend.

In the meantime I bid you goodnight.

Maddie.

Good luck and I hope Tilley is soon back on the road.

Stephen