Rear axles

This thread is for discussing technical topics.

Moderators: Ian Grace, Will Grace

Post Reply
Ian Grace
Site Admin
Posts: 5035
Joined: Sun Nov 19, 2006 12:55 am
Location: USA

Rear axles

Post by Ian Grace »

Bruce Sharman from Western Australia asked me to post the following two pictures, with a couple of questions. My answers below the photos ...

Can anyone identify these 2 rear axles. One is in M18904 the other came as a spare with the cars. The centres look similar but the axle that is out of the car (red oxide) is much heavier/thicker around the shaft area. Are they both minor? Is one a later axle. The axle in the car looks as though it has had some rewelding carried out where the shafts join the diff housing. Or it was very poorly welded at manufacture. This axle also has webbing connecting the diff housing to the shaft. The red axle doesn’t have this webbing. Which is correct for the 1930 cammy Minor?

Image

Image

Bruce,

The axle in the chassis with the riveted webs is exactly correct for the OHC Minor (including the welding!). The red-oxide axle is the later, slightly stronger axle from a SV Minor.

Check if the gear ratios are still visible on the diffs. They should be stamped on the top of the aluminium castings.

If both axles still have their original diffs in them, then the OHC one should read 9/44 and the SV should be 8/43.

You will also probably notice that the brake drubs are a different size. The OHC drums have a narrower flange on their outer rim than the SV. I can see from the photos that the SV ones are the correct, wide-rimmed variety, but I cannot see the drums on the OHC axle, but suspect that they will also be the correct (for this OHC chassis) narrow-rimmed units.

The only other very subtle difference will be that the angle of the brake cam levers will be slightly greater on the SV axle – the rake angle was increased in the SV cars to try to prevent them pulling over-vertical when the brakes were applied. Assuming you have all of these, I would use the later SV ones in your restoration – they will improve the brakes slightly, and with a Minor, you need all the brakes you can get!

Incidentally, the chassis below the OHC chassis in the photo looks considerably better. What's the number of this other chassis? If you do use the other chassis, you can always swap the front/right dumbirons with the chassis numbers stamped on them. But don't tell the Registrar! :wink:
Bruce
Posts: 32
Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 4:59 am

Re: Rear axles

Post by Bruce »

Hi Ian
Yep the other chassis under the car in the photos is in very good condition. It is highly likely i will end up using this chassis. The chassis on the car is almost non existant in the engine bay area.
I checked the good chassis this morning and it appears to be M6626 I think. There appears to be a space between the 6 and 2 so it reads M66 space 26. Would this be so or is there possibly a number missing?
On the rusted chassis I can read the M1 and the last 4 the rest has been eaten away so it may not be worth changing the dumb irons over.
Bruce
Ian Grace
Site Admin
Posts: 5035
Joined: Sun Nov 19, 2006 12:55 am
Location: USA

Re: Rear axles

Post by Ian Grace »

Bruce,

I'd say that the number is M6626, not M66X26, unless the Ozzies built over 30,000 more OHC Minors in secret!

Actually, M6626 was one of a batch of eleven chassis (M6621 to M6631) which were never bodied at Cowley, and the great majority of these driving chasiss were exported, so that al ties in.

You can check this data for this, and any chassis by pulling up the Genome spreasheet from the Members' Area of the website, which lists the body type fitted to every OHC chassis made - except the 500 or so Y-prefixed chassis sent out to Australia in late 1929 in knocked-down form, and for which records have not surfaced.
Post Reply