MD22 sewing machine sound

It's only the shim you need to remove with the camshaft in place and I've done that on many OHC engines. Once you remove the shim you can either read the size on its lower side or measure its thickness with a gauge.

, it's a doddle.

Maybe if the shims are accessible but aren't they under the " bucket" on this one ?

it looks to me as though the special tools are needed to hold the camshaft down, after removing the cover, in order to measure the clearances . Then you have to remove them , lift off the camshaft and the buckets to get to the shims.
 
I thought with ohc engines, the tappets don't go out of adjustment like the old screw and locknut type. If yours are noisy, they either weren't set up right in the first place or have had many years of wear.
 
it looks to me as though the special tools are needed to hold the camshaft down, after removing the cover, in order to measure the clearances . Then you have to remove them , lift off the camshaft and the buckets to get to the shims.

Indeed. As I mentioned earlier, I have removed camshafts to change the shims in the past because I haven't had the correct "hold down" tool ..... but I've never had to do that because it was the only way.

My "professional" opinion ...... the engine designer for this engine was clearly having a bad day and came up with a pile of do-do! :D

Richard
 
RichardS;5825750. My "professional" opinion ...... the engine designer for this engine was clearly having a bad day and came up with a pile of do-do! :D Richard[/QUOTE said:
Without knowing the design constraints. you may be being rather harsh.
For instance, AFAIK, the base car engine was for transverse mounting. The width constraint and gearbox position in that layout make for a tall engine. The camshaft bearing design might shave a few mm, allowing a slightly lower bonnet-line.
It might also be cheaper to make, important on a mass-produced vehicle.
These would be higher design priorities than the very rare need to check valve clearances.
Just a thought!
I doubt that the designer had boat-owners in mind.
 
Last edited:
Without knowing the design constraints. you may be being rather harsh.

Possibly ... but Tranona mentioned above that this engine was originally designed for the "British Leyland engine for the Montego and Maestro" ..... and in that short sentence referenced two of the worst cars ever built in the UK. I don't know whether the same engine was used in the Allegro but if it was that's then a complete roll call of the death of the BL. :(

Richard
 
Possibly ... but Tranona mentioned above that this engine was originally designed for the "British Leyland engine for the Montego and Maestro" ..... and in that short sentence referenced two of the worst cars ever built in the UK. I don't know whether the same engine was used in the Allegro but if it was that's then a complete roll call of the death of the BL. :(

Richard

The engine in question is a Perkins Prima 2.0l In it's day it was a little bit special, the only good component in the BL cars to which it was fitted. There are numerous boats out there fitted with this engine, up to 40 feet or so. Despite the inconvenient cam cover arrangement it's a good engine.
 
Pity they didn't get round to marinating the old AJS/Matchless 350 & 500 singles. The pushrod adjustment cover was held on by just three knurled nuts you undid by hand, though you did need a couple of spanners for the adjuster and lock nuts on the pushrods. (Just as well considering how often it needed doing!) A special tool was also required for timing the spark: a cigarette paper!:D
 
Possibly ... but Tranona mentioned above that this engine was originally designed for the "British Leyland engine for the Montego and Maestro" ..... and in that short sentence referenced two of the worst cars ever built in the UK. I don't know whether the same engine was used in the Allegro but if it was that's then a complete roll call of the death of the BL. :(

Richard

That is harsh, particularly on the engine. Why do you not seem to accept that it was a clever piece of design that stood the test of time? Modern OHC engines really do not need regular valve clearance checking so what you see as a problem is not a problem for uses of this engine. In the last 20 years I have had 7 OHC engines in cars, 2 of which I ran to 90000 miles and not one has ever needed any check on valve clearance.

No this engine was not used in the Allegro which had an earlier pioneering OHC engine, the O series, which again was the best bit of an otherwise awful car.
 
Why do you not seem to accept that it was a clever piece of design that stood the test of time?

You're all taking this a bit seriously. :)

To my mind "stood the test of time" means that the technology has been adopted and perfected by future generations of engineers. I wonder how many design engineers have followed this principle? There may be many but all I can say is that I've never seen one. :)

Richard
 
It sounds pretty much like a normal push rod/tappet engine to me, even though it's a sewing machine. Probably too large clearances but the only way to eliminate the tappety sound is to install a bucket and shim head. :)

Richard
It is a bucket and shim head!
S
 
Possibly ... but Tranona mentioned above that this engine was originally designed for the "British Leyland engine for the Montego and Maestro" ..... and in that short sentence referenced two of the worst cars ever built in the UK. I don't know whether the same engine was used in the Allegro but if it was that's then a complete roll call of the death of the BL. :(

Richard
The engine is one if the most bullet proof ones ever made by BL/ Perkins. Only 17:1 compression ratio using direct injection also to the surprise of the engineers they got superb fuel economy. The engines were desired by Landy owners and were seen as a positive change both for the mpg and the torque. There were various changes along the way with turbo and slight compression ratio changes. The original question, sewing machine noise? Either tappets OR cam belt components! The engine I overhauled was within spec even though it came from a rusted old Maestro Turbo. As explained I used some flat bar and studs to hold the cam down whilst I checked the clearances. I had the advantage of having the head off when I did it. To do it in situ is a challenge, to get the cam holders on you have to take the cam cover off which is what holds the cam in place and so as you undo the bolts the valve springs push the cam out of place. There is a special tool that I think holds the cam sprocket and back of the cam where the water pump drive is, in place. A workaround is to put the cam timing pins in place, slack the cam belt, accept the cam moving and then clamp it back in place with the flat bars. Then check the valve clearances. If they are really out then I would take the head off, in fact if they are really wide then there is something seriously worn, as in cam bearings or cam shaft.
Stu
 
Possibly ... but Tranona mentioned above that this engine was originally designed for the "British Leyland engine for the Montego and Maestro" ..... and in that short sentence referenced two of the worst cars ever built in the UK. I don't know whether the same engine was used in the Allegro but if it was that's then a complete roll call of the death of the BL. :(

Richard
This was the engine that nearly saved BL! It was far ahead of its time with superb economy and useable power. Do some googling! Mine is 17 years old, done lots if hours, starts first time, using 1/2 litre of oil in a season of 100ish hours. And the beauty is that spares are still available from www.parts4engines.com fir reasonable prices. If the OP cam is sha gged then a scrappy will be a goid place to source a head.
Stu
 
Just a thought - if the cam-cover wasn't tightened down properly (i.e. coming a bit loose) that would cause the valve clearances to go wonky by allowing vertical movement of the camshaft. Worth checking that it is bolted down tight?
 
The engine in question is a Perkins Prima 2.0l In it's day it was a little bit special, the only good component in the BL cars to which it was fitted. There are numerous boats out there fitted with this engine, up to 40 feet or so. Despite the inconvenient cam cover arrangement it's a good engine.

Or indeed 50ft (with the turbo intercooler).
 
Top