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 MGA - crank handle guides

The crank handle guides on my '57 1500 roadster are not in line. [can't crank the motor ] The problem is that either the motor is sitting too low, [ the mounts are new ] or the last guide hole is to high. It probably had a knock at the front some time, but it looks ok. The easiest option would be to pack the motor up, but I'm concerned that would cause a problem with the drive shaft alignment , gearbox pointing down. Any suggestions appreciated
Thanks Sean
S Sherry

Sean

I am not sure what the answer is. However, just to let you know that you are not alone, mine has not lined up in the 10 years I have had the car and I am aware that others also have the problem.

My back would not stand cranking the engine so I have never got round to addressing the issue. Instead, I make efforts to keep the electrics reliable.

Those starting handles can be vicious and bite the unwary. Broken thumbs are a common injury for 'swingers'.

Steve

Steve Gyles

Sean,
I would not be afraid of modifying the crossbar guide if it is too high as long as it is not so high you had to modify the crossbar. I would prefer this to raising the engine! Have a good day!

John
John Progess

Sean I agree with John. Here is a picture without bumper or valance. The center guide in the round tube could be modified to allow the cranck to have a straight shot.


R J Brown

Here is a shot showing how close to the steering rack the crank should be. Less than 1/4 inch. Pardon the bondo dust it just came back from the body shop. This is with new mounts with old sagging mounts the crank can rub against the rack. Don't raise the engine.


R J Brown

Mine has the same problem, and at least on mine, I don't see how modifying any of the guides would solve anything. On mine the problem is that the crank rubs on the steering rack. If I push and twist, I can barely wedge the crank into the dog nut. I would need to raise the engine at least 1/8 of an inch to keep the crank from rubbing on the steering rack. However, because the rack is only about an inch in front of the dog nut, and the hole in the bumper is nearly two feet from the dog nut, I would have to raise the bumper 3 inches to get that 1/8 inch at the rack.

Like Steve, I have had this problem since I got the car about 7 years ago. I put new motor mounts on back then but it didn't help anything. I have thought about cutting some 1/8 inch thick plates to put under the mounts to raise the engine but solving this crank problem is way down on my list of things to do. I don't see how raising the front of the engine 1/8 to 1/4 inch would make much difference to the driveshaft alignment. I have wondered, if perhaps the motor mounts I got were perhaps just not thick enough.
Jeff Schultz

Jeff,
maybe you are on the right track about the thickness of the replacement engine mounts. Given that the B engine was fitted to a dozen and one different vehicles we could all be stuck with a "universal" replacement mount ? With so many cars with the same problem I can't see all of them with raised steering racks blocking the crank dog.
Has anyone raised their engine ??
thanks for all replies Sean
S Sherry

Just been out to look at mine. My engine must be sitting about 3/4" low. The crank pulley is only about 1/4" to 3/8" above the cross member.

Looking at the angle of the rubber mounts they seem nearer to the vertical plane than horizontal plane, so I don't think their thickness would make that much difference to engine height. Something strange here. Maybe we need to check some measurements with a correctly aligned engine.

Steve
Steve Gyles

My crank actually has a slight bend in it. This aligns the dog nut properly and does not interfer with the cranking turn. Wheh mounted in the trunck, the bend is hardly visable.
Gordon Harrison

I have recently put new engine mounts on since one of them split and nearly shook the car to pieces - BUT I haven't thought about trying the starting handle to see if it still fits - will try it tomorrow . cheers Cam
Cam Cunningham

Thanks for the photos guys. The problem it seems is down to either a low motor or a high cross member? Can't see how the rack mounting could be wrong. Also I feel that it would take an almighty whack to move the cross member up --- the suspension geometary would be haywire. I just don't understand how so many cars can end up with the same problem-- maybe they were born that way ! ! I'm now determined to get to the bottom of this. I'll find some one who knew these cars when they were new ? ? ?
thanks again Sean
S Sherry

To R J. Brown
your photo shows just how little distance I have between the rack and the starter dog.
could you please check how much thread length there is left after the nuts on your engine mounts are tightened. Mine have room for probably two more nuts. Maybe the suggestion that the replacement mounts are not thick enough is the problem. I checked the level of the engine as best I could and it seems to be horizontal, ditto the top surface of the radiator. Thanks Sean
S Sherry

Measured up the (installed) rubber engine mount on my car (3cm thick) and it is about the same as new. Spoke to Bob West, no obvious ideas, other than installing shims. Apparently the Twin Cam has a shim in one (or both?) engine mount made out of second mount stripped of its rubber.

Other thoughts that have occured to me include the mounting arrangement for the 5-speed gearbox perhaps tilting the engine forward on its bearers, but I am not convinced. What power trains do other 'low hangers' have?

Steve
Steve Gyles

I just checked the clearance between the hand crank and the steering rack on this one (58 coupe) it is 1/8th inch.
Here is a picture that may answer your question Sean.
New mounts are 1 1/8 thick.
I believe that when the mounts sag they don't get thinner but change shape. They go from a rectangle to a trapezoid when viewed from the front. On my (unrestored)60 with a early b motor and saggy mounts there is no clearance between the crank and the rack.


R J Brown

RJ,
You are right. As long as the rubber is still bonded to the two plates, they would have to get trapezoidal to sag. But because they are mounted at about a 30 deg angle, they would have to get thinner or more compressed also. That was my thinking on putting shims behind them. Even though the mounts are more vertical than horizontal, putting shims behind them should force them into a trapezoid shape biased in the upward direction.

I found pictures of new MGA mounts here that appear to show them starting out as trapezoids slightly biased upward.
http://www.drivewire.com/mgparts/catalog/mgmgaenginemount.html

Jeff
Jeff Schultz

Mine didn't line up either - used a 6 mm dowel to see what sort of clearances I needed and took to the cross member bracket with a Dremel sanding drum. Fits a treat now.
Mike
Mike Ellsmore

There seem to be two different problems with the hand crank. Some people seem to have the guide bracket out of line, and for some the front of the engine is so low that the steering rack gets in the way of the crank. Maybe this can all be explained by bumps and bruises and bent metal over the years, but at least on mine I can't see anything that looks bent.

I can see how the frame extension could easily be bent enough that the guide on it interfered. I find it much harder to see how any of the brackets for the steering rack or the motor mounts could be bent enough to drop the engine down significantly, but I am sure it is possible.

For those with the low engine problem, it might help if we compared the clearance between the pulley and the crossmember below it. On mine it is about 3/4" and my engine would need to be raised 1/8" to 1/4" for the crank to clear the steering rack. In the first pictures that RJ posted, I would guestimate about 1" clearance which is probably the proper amount of clearance.
Jeff Schultz

I used the metal mounting plate from an old motor mount, cleaned it and inserted it on the lower side of the new mount; it raised the front of the engine 1/8" that was the clearance I needed for the crank handle. I only used one on the left side (carb side)

Cliff(SC)
Jones

Jeff

The clearance with the cross member all depends on what diameter bottom pulley you have installed. I have a 6" diam pulley. Clearance is about 1/4".

Steve
Steve Gyles

There is some concern about the possible negative effects of using a packing plate under the engine mount.
The attached extract from the mga twin cam Workshop Manual shows that the MG factory did it.

Mick


Mick Anderson

I do not understand IT WORKS!
I found the plate there and replaced it, until this thread I had no idea what it was for.

Best of luck: Cliff(SC)
Jones

Well, my inquiry certainaly set the cat amoungst the pigeons. Thanks to all the responses, I'm now convinced my problem is down to the front of the engine being to low, for what ever reason. eg., the origonal positing of the engine mount brackets welded to the chassis, the position of the rack brackets welded to the cross member, the hight of the said brackets etc etc. No laser guided positioning for anything in the fifties, bits fitted where they touched ! ! At the end of the day the A is a fine little car and great fun when fully sorted.

Again Thanks for all the help Sean
S Sherry

Hi Sean, Just been out for a drive - fine sunny afternoon here. Tried the starting handle and it fits no problem, despite having fitted new engine mounts - so that eliminates them from the equation. - cheers Cam
Cam Cunningham

Cam

I don't understand your logic. What do you mean by "Tried the starting handle and it fits no problem, despite having fitted new engine mounts - so that eliminates them from the equation."

Did you ever have the problem with your old engine mounts?

Steve
Steve Gyles

Hi Steve, Perhaps "despite" was the wrong word. The starting handle worked OK before fitting the new engine mounts and as someone indicated earlier that new engine mounts may be thinner and therefore lower the engine - I tried my starting handle whilst the car was out of the garage yesterday - "It fits no problem". So my engine mounts being a standard Moss item would indicate that it would be unlikely that the engine mounts would be the problem in not being able to fit the sarting handle in others' cars. - cheers Cam
Cam Cunningham

Cam

I understand now. I had Bob West measure new mounts for me. Exactly the same as my installed 10 year old mounts. They also appear to have no sag - unlike me. I am taking the engine out in 3 weeks for a look around, servicing and general clean-up, so I will probably address the problem then.

Steve
Steve Gyles

Hi Steve, If you need any help in getting your engine out I would love to help - ulterior motive - practice for when I have to do mine ( I am away from 24th to 28th though) - cheers Cam
Cam Cunningham

Cam

That's when I am planning on doing the work. I thought you would have fitted your 5-speed by now.

Steve
Steve Gyles

Hi Steve - Yes I should have fitted the 5 speed by now - but the money got diverted into a Caribbean cruise instead - although I was thinking about doing it when sunbathing on Montego Bay beach (?). Pity I can't help out with your engine removal - (spending the week in sunny Birmingham at a union conference) - if it gets delayed let me know - cheers Cam
Cam Cunningham

This thread was discussed between 28/02/2008 and 03/03/2008

MG MGA index

This thread is from the archive. The Live MG MGA BBS is active now.