mgs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Thrust washers et al

To: b-schleusner@ti.com
Subject: Re: Thrust washers et al
From: npenney <npenney@erols.com>
Date: Mon, 10 Mar 1997 10:20:15 -0800
>Having heard so many horror stories about the infamous "thrust washers" I
>decided to ask the Triumph group about the estimated useful life of thrust
>washers.  Well let me tell you, this question went over about as well as a fart
>in church.  I have not received one response about the above said washers.
>Needless to say it didn't give me a warm feeling about either Triumphs or the
>list.

Funny, I've watched and read the thrust washer thread over there.  Don't know 
how you've 
been missing it.  Sorry you've gotten so upset over not having a question 
answered.  Cripes, 
I've had many questions go unanswered, both here, there, and just about 
everywhere I've 
asked questions.

>      What is the estimated useful life of thrust washers?

Recommendations are typically around 30k, with at least annual inspections of 
thrust play, 
as well recommendations for full thrust washers, and not just partials.

>        Does driving style affect the useful life i.e. highway vs. city?

Hard driving is always hard on equipment.  But thrust washers itself aren't 
that sensitive 
to it.  They are senstive to things that shove the engines crank for and aft.

>        Why don't MGs have the same problem with thrust washers?

Different design.  MG's have their own problems.

>        If this is/was such a known engineering defect why didn't Britsh
>        Leyland fix the problem?

They used Lucas, need we say more?


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>