Morris Minor Owners Club

I'm lifting the engine out to change the clutch fork, do I have to drain the engine oil? The last time I had the engine out was 10 years ago and I can't remember

not unless you want to tip it over onto its side when its out,but are you lifting the gearbox with it, which is the safer way to prevent damage to the clutch and first motion shaft,and making it easier to mate the engine and box for refitting.if so the box needs draining or it will drop its oil all over the floor as the prop shaft pulls out.

Thanks

Why does the clutch fork need renewing? But as above - leave the oil in. No need to lift the engine out either - just slide it forward after removing the radiator!!

Apparently I have the fork from a 948 box, fitted to my 1098 box, which makes the clutch heavy. Also, I have the gear stick from a 948, but that's an easier swap!

I doubt the wrong fork would make it 'heavy' - but it could affect the amount of free-play/general adjustment available. Has that been a problem?

Have you checked the clutch pedal and linkage is well lubricated. Many years ago I helped a friend take the engine out of his Jaguar 3.8 as the clutch was slipping. New clutch, road test and still slipping. More investigation found that the clutch pedal was almost seized on its pivot shaft! A couple of squirts of 3-in-1 later, and perfect clutch operation!

The BMC Parts List dated 1966 only shows one clutch withdrawal arm for both 948 and 1098 engines - Pt. No. 22G 166. The 1098 clutch is bigger and probably heavier than a 948, but I have not heard that it is a problem. Would be a pity to go through all the work of changing it, only to find there is no difference?

The gear lever from a 948 is very floppy in an 1098 gearbox because the length of the lever under the ball is slightly longer in a 1098 gearbox, so the 948 lever is not fully engaged in the 1098 linkage - been there, done that, before I knew there was a difference!

There are different carbon thrust assemblies for 948 and 1098 -again won't make it 'heavy' but could affect travel - and just maybe the fork is coming to the end of it's travel if the wrong carbon has been fitted - which would indeed make it 'heavy' !! Take the rubber bungs out - shine a light in one and peer in the other to see if you can see anything interesting.

Its impossible to drive the car comfortably in traffic because it takes so much effort to press the clutch at the end of its travel. The car was like this when I bought it 15 years ago but I've done so few miles, it hasn't been a problem until now. The car was in Millennium Morris Minors having new sills etc. and they thought a linkage overhaul would do the trick but it didn't help. They suggested the fork and gear lever swap. There's a noticeable difference between the 948 and 1098 forks so hopefully this is the cause. Good idea about taking the bung out first - I've got an old 1098 engine and box I can pull apart to compare.

I have the 948 fork with my Spridget 1275 engine & 'box. (LH- that's why). Never had any problems, and doesn't feel any different from before the swap, when everything was 948.

Does sound like it is an 'end of travel' problem - but whether fork or carbon thrust (or both) you will have to determine.

Thanks for all the suggestions. I hadn't given any thought to the bearing. The car is off the road for a while so there's no loss if I take the engine out. I'll take some pictures and get them on here - someone might spot something obviously wrong.

My labour rate is cheaper than the garage so I'm happy to try first.

Note that MOSS show 3 different forks - and 2 carbon thrusts. http://www.moss-europe.co.uk/Shop/ViewP ... exID=17074 I would certainly have a new 1098 carbon thrust in stock before starting the job.

The clutch in my car is now much lighter and easy to use. The cause was the wrong release bearing was fitted, by the previous owner's garage. It had a bearing for a 948 when it needed the 1098 one. The wrong bearing was making the 1098 linkage work at extreme angles.
As a separate but related issue, the replacement release bearing for the 1098. I ordered one a while ago, from a well known UK supplier. I forgot I had it and ordered another. The two release bearings, same supplier, same part number, have different thicknesses of carbon. It is 3 - 4 mm difference.

You've got me thinking that I might have incorrectly recalled what I was told about the clutch.

I'll see what happens tomorrow and order a new bearing next week.

Maybe the thinner bearing you had Roni was the result of cost cutting?

Or maybe your informant didn't know what they were talking about.... They have already conned you into a clutch mechanism rebuild that you maybe didn't need....

bmcecosse wrote:Note that MOSS show 3 different forks - and 2 carbon thrusts. http://www.moss-europe.co.uk/Shop/ViewP ... exID=17074 I would certainly have a new 1098 carbon thrust in stock before starting the job.

I went to the Moss page, and searched their catalog for the bearing, and they came up with three, 13, 21, and 24 mm depth. Exactly what depth is 13,21 or 24 mm? Thickness of the carbon face?
http://www.moss-europe.co.uk/Shop/ViewP ... ortOrder=6
Next question:
Am I right in assuming that 948 has the smoothcase, and everything else is the ribcase?

You can always fit the 'Ball Race' release bearing available from ESM spares Part No: Com707A. I know it is expensive but it does make for a lighter pedal. Have a similar set up fitted to my minor and it is much better than the standard carbon and should last longer.

803 and 948 are smoothcase.

bmcecosse wrote:Or maybe your informant didn't know what they were talking about.... They have already conned you into a clutch mechanism rebuild that you maybe didn't need....

I looked at the receipt and I was charged £30 for the overhaul, pin and bush. My guess is they were going for the cheaper option first, to see if it helped and the car hadn't been on the road for 8 years so the bush was probably shot.

I'm in for the day. Didn't get the engine out because I got chatting. Everything is ready to go for tomorrow though. Some of the spare gear boxes I have still have the forks and bearings so at least I've got 1098 ones to compare with what's already fitted to the car.

I'll have to think about the new roller bearing. It might be an unnecessary expense as I've only done 2000 miles since I bought the car 15 years ago!