MG-Cars.net

Welcome to our resource for MG Car Information.

Recommendations

Parts

MG parts spares and accessories are available for MG T Series (TA, MG TB, MG TC, MG TD, MG TF), Magnette, MGA, Twin cam, MGB, MGBGT, MGC, MGC GT, MG Midget, Sprite and other MG models from British car spares company LBCarCo.

MG Midget and Sprite Technical - Mikalor style exhaust clamps

Mikalor style exhaust clamps may not work on stainless steel exhaust systems

N.B. Mikalor don’t advertise them as exhaust clamps that I’ve seen

- I ordered what I thought were Mikalor stainless steel clamps advertised as by a third party ‘stainless exhaust clamps’

when they arrived they were Norma versions but I fitted them as Norma is a good make

these kept coming loose though

so I got the proper, actual Mikalor Supra Heavy-duty hose clamp (W4 full stainless steel clamp and screw fitting) and fitted those instead – see photo

they worked themselves loose too

so I added a lock nut which doesn’t really work as a lock nut as such because of the screw thread direction but I thought it might help stop any movement – it didn’t

a friend recommended the Mikalor clamps as he has them on his exhaust, that like mine is low to the ground so needs every extra millimetre of clearance it can get, he’s had no problems but has a mild not stainless exhaust system

another friend said that those types of clamps are not suitable for exhausts

so Mikalor style exhaust clamps may not work on stainless steel exhaust systems
Nigel Atkins

sorry photo went missing I must have clicked on wrong button


Nigel Atkins

what's wrong with the 'normal' U shaped ones? You can put them on sideways, and if that causes the exhaust to hit the ground over a flat one like above them the car's too soft or too low for the road :p

I don't tend to use Nylocs on exhausts thinking that the heat will just melt the plastic out.
Rob Armstrong

I've got the mikalor type clamps (different brand)
And they are rock solid.
Though mine tighten with a nut and not with the bolt end.

Fitting them finaly got me rid of the nasty noises over speed humps.

The biggest problem with U clamps is that they tend to deform the exhaust pipe even if the hit is only minor.
Making it impossible to remove and refit the exhaust.
Onno K

I use the type used on VW Golfs (Mk2). Not got a photo but it is basically a strip about 1 1/2 wide with one pinch bolt. You can have this at the side for ground clearance. Has a couple of advantages in that it doesn't crush the tube like the U bolt type and cos it's so wide it covers the slots that sometimes leak. I think it was someone here that recommended them.

John
John Payne

The answer to U bolts crushing the tube, is too use a flat of metal under the U. No more crushed ex/tube.

U's are cheap, so I use them.
Lawrence Slater

VW clamps are cheap as well, and easier to get undone and the pipes don't get shrunk together.
Alex G Matla

I wonder if VW stuff is as cheap here in the UK though?
Lawrence Slater

I thought you were keen on paying extra for quality Lawrence?
Robert (Bob) Midget Turbo

I'm keen on paying the least I can for anything if it lasts. Besides, I don't consider U bolts to be poor quality just because they are U bolts. They work well enough for me, and have done so for yonks.:)
Lawrence Slater

U-bolts deform the pipes even without hitting anything, making it very difficult to separate the exhaust components.

The type that John Payne refers to sound exactly like the ones supplied by Maniflow.
Dave O'Neill2

John,
if you've got a photo I'd be interested please

Rob,
I started with U-bolts fitted sideways and just about wore through two lots

even the band at the front on this type has grazes and worn flat if not thin - I'll put a photo up

the car is way too low at the front because some l*eing b*astard that owns a 'specialist expert' outfit told me the new front springs would only drop the car by about half an inch, then when I went to collect it and could clearly see that despite being on new springs front and rear that it sat low to the front he then said "No I said half to three quarters of an inch"

it would appear 1" drop springs drop the car by at least an inch, well my car anyway

as I parked inside for Peter Burgess's rollers he comments "That's low at the front"

Nigel Atkins

Whatever. :)
Lawrence Slater

stop sulking U-bolts are back on :)

although just the extra few millimtres or so will catch just that little bit more often
Nigel Atkins

I guess the band on the clamp is about 1 millimetre thick and a couple of those gouges are about half a millimetre deep plus the raised edge has been flattened and serrated so the exhaust is really catching

note 'soot' inside where exhaust joint was leaking


Nigel Atkins

Then your problem will only really be solved by raising the car up at the front. If the flattest clamps still hit the deck, no amount of fitting something different will help in the end and will just rub through.
S Overy

well I don’t want to be slowing down on my favourite types of roads and I've put up with it long enough

I got the exhaust manifold a little closer to the underside

tyres with an 80 ratio instead of 70 will have to wait and they’re pumped up as much as I want them

no chance of the Mrs or I going on a diet

so yes it's raise the front, either longer (standard length) uprated springs - or is it possible to have spacers to lift the present springs an inch?

does it work a ¼” spacer lift it an inch or is that for lowering only?

or is it ½” spacer to lift/lower an inch?
Nigel Atkins

The spacers only work for lowering the car I'm afraid. Once the spring pan is bolted straight to the wishbone, that's as high as it's getting. So only longer springs will help in your case. Unless you can fit some sort of spacer ring between the spring and either of the mounts? Not sure how good an idea that might be though, but it's the only one that comes to mind.
S Overy

thanks yes I thought that was the case although the ratio still escapes me (1:2 or 1:4) especialy as Moss sell spacers -
'The ride height can be adjusted up in increments of 5mm using 3mm spacer rings . . . Max 2 Per Side'
so at only 10mm hardly worth the effort for what I want and I agree with you I don't fancy the idea anyway

I don't think I could get a small enough additional spacer spring so I'll be looking for uprated standard height springs and replace the existing springs (and find if they were even 1" lower as sold to me by the l*eing b*stard)

any suggestions of standard height uprated springs

the ones I have on are supposed to be 340lb and if they are I'm happy with that
Nigel Atkins

Peter May can make springs up to order. 340lb isn't _that_ much stiffer than standard (270 IIRC).

However, I have 400lb 8" free length springs on mine (that's just slightly over an 1.5" shorter than standard, if Hayne's is to be believed) and my exhaust doesn't hit. Maybe it's the extra stiffness, but I don't think so, as the roads round here are very very uneven so my exhaust still has scars from when the mounts I used were just a little too long.

Surely you can fiddle with the exhaust mounts to get it a little higher rather than having to change the springs?
OrangeSpyderMan

OSM,
thanks for suggesting Peter May

I don't want the front too low or stiff as I like the roads of England and Wales that go over mountain, moor, and dale roads that can have sudden sharp dips

this midget has been over to the 'mountains' of Belgium but with the previous suspension

I was told that my front suspension was used on a Spridget in the LB’s showroom that toured all over Europe without bottoming out and that the owner liked to be comfortable and it did have the most comfortable, armchair style, looking seats I’ve ever seen in a Spridget - I now wonder if they were needed because of the suspension :)

I’ve taken the exhaust off to reposition it so that it was fully clear of the rear shock, it’s the front first joint at the manifold where it hits the road and this present manifold does hang as low as the previous

Funny you should mention the Haynes, it shows the springs as 9.59” (244 mm) where as Terry Horler’s book shows 9.85” (250.2 mm) – now both books are known to have errors so which is correct, if either

Perhaps the LB just put shorter springs on of the standard poundage or springs for another model or even marque – I only know they looked new and the car sat lower than I was told it would
Nigel Atkins

er, just noticed I missed out the word not (again bad habit of mine)

should have put
>>and this present manifold does not hang as low as the previous<<

photo of previous exhaust manifold (with what look like a peeble on it) with present front suspension

front shocks have very little movement so it's not them wallowing about

could the engine mounting blocks be wrong or fitted wrong(?)


Nigel Atkins

Would certainly look at the engine mounts as mine is a lot higher


Onno K

Onno,
talk about rubbing salt into the wound - the Mikalor style clamp with additional locknut, next you'll be telling me your exhaust is s/s :)

I'm not sure I could face changing the engine mounts as there is so much trouble with and parts that have rubber at the present, found TRE fitted only last August have slpit boot, possibly new wiper blades being no good at wiping and I'm not sure how long the recent ARB drop links will last, then the previous tyre valves, before that the new top hose . . .

I think it might be easier to lower the roads!
Nigel Atkins

Update:

I've had a custom made middle exhaust pipe fitted which was to have used a more circular version of U-clamps that I'd never seen before but they were out of stock of those in the small size of my pipe as they're more used to bigger, more complex and exotic systems than mine

what they used was Norma, I think this type (as photo) - http://www.normagroup.com/kunden/norma/ttw.nsf/id/EN_NORMACLAMP_GBS_SD

I was told they stopped using Mikalor as they'd had one/a few where the weld spots broke


Nigel Atkins

I suppose the upside of the clamps catching the ground is that at least it helps to stop the manifold being flattened. Sort of like a skid plate would do.
On my 1098 engine the problem is worse as the manifold listed for the 1275 and 1098 is the same, but the 1098 block is shorter, putting the manifold closer to the ground. Someone one here recently posted about shortening the down pipes on the manifold which is something I will be looking at this winter.

Bernie.
b higginson

Nigel,
in answer to your question, I think that the confusion stems from the fact that the front springs were changed several times, and never coinciding with an engine change. The Bentley is more clear about it than Horler, though a careful re-read will show this up in his book too. I'm not surprised that the Haynes missed this level of detail, as it tends to be more general than the other two:

'58 9.4"
Jan '66 9.59"
Oct '73 9.85"
Jan '76 10.2"


I have always found it curious that the springs were NOT changed with the vehicle weight changes, 9.59" was introduced almost a year before the 1275, two years after the wind up windows & 1/2 elliptic rear springs, and 10 months before the folding hood.

I suspect that the 9.85" in 10/'73 was adopted to meet the emerging FMVSS bumper height regulations (along with the Sabrina over riders and some extra bumper reinforcement).

Then, strangest of all, the 10.2" was not adopted until a full 14 months after the +145# weight increase of the 1500 engine and bumper changes from 10/'74.


Norm "springs eternal" Kerr


Norm Kerr

Bernie,
as well as the scraped Mikalor I almost wore through 3 U-bolts clamps, the two that were fitted with the 'u' as a 'c' (if you follow me) wore through the bottom nut so you could just see the thread of the bolt

the photo shows the old manifold the new one is only slightly higher and I've got a good dent in the front of the manifold pipe not as big as the dent in the passenger footwell

Norm,
thanks for your reply, I resurected this thread so you probably didn't notice the date of my post, as I've now been dealing with springs for a while I did eventually pick up that information but not all the dates, thank you
Nigel Atkins

Nigel, I think the Mikalor ones have changed over the years, as many things not for the better. The barrel that the bolt screws into is now smaller, no longer a good fit in the strap. Over time, the strap distorts to the shape of the barrel, causing it to come loose.
If you retighten after a while, they usually stay ok. The Norma type do the same, but usually worse. as the barrel is pressed steel and not solid. I got some from Steve's Stainless some years ago, which were excellent quality, but sorry I've no idea what make they were. Used them on the Caterham and Midget with no probs.
Cheers John
HALL JOHN

now I realise the two might not be like model to like model of clamps but I notice comparing the photo of the Mikalor with the Norma that the Mikalor as well as having spot welds instead of slots and bends that the Mikalor has only half barrel threaded sections where as that particular Norm clamps has full barrel bits

I've also noticed tha the sliding top section of the Mikalor tends to snap off quite easily yet idoen't move much when you tighten the screw

so John I think you're right, they aint what they used to be no more
Nigel Atkins

This thread was discussed between 27/01/2012 and 30/05/2012

MG Midget and Sprite Technical index

This thread is from the archive. The Live MG Midget and Sprite Technical BBS is active now.