40+ Years With A 1974 Triumph Toledo 1300 “HL Special”

[naskeet]

Replacing Rear-Suspension Dampers – April 1983

Sometime in late-1982 or early-1983, it was noticed that the original factory-fitted suspension dampers had started to weep oil. Consequently, in mid-February 1983, I purchased some new replacement dampers by mail order from Quip Accessories in Cleckheaton, Yorkshire. The dampers which were said to be “20% uprated over standard”, were Monroe Radialmatic (part No. R3354), costing £31•05 for the pair, including VAT and carriage.

At that time, I was a still a postgraduate engineering student at Cranfield, where Mark Tothill (fellow student who owned the Triumph Dolomite Sprint) later loaned me his coil-spring compressors, enabling me whilst home for the weekend, to replace the rear dampers on 2nd April 1983, at a mileage of 31,176. These dampers were still serviceable when I laid-up the car in mid-1999, at a total mileage of 101,024.

QUIP receipt – Monroe Radialmatic R3354 Toledo shock absorbers

[naskeet]

Substitute & Supplementary, Right & Left Hand TEX Door Mirrors – Autumn 1983

At the time of purchase, the Toledo was equipped with a Wingard, ceiling-mounted, black-plastic, interior rear-view mirror and a single stainless-steel TEX door-mirror fitted to the offside (i.e. driver’s side) front door, but I felt handicapped by the lack of a rear-view mirror on the nearside; especially when driving on motorways, dual-carriageways, roundabouts or one-way streets, where rearward vision on the nearside can often be critical and looking over one’s left shoulder isn’t always safe or practical.

Board index » The Triumph Dolomite Club » Dolomite-related [Start here!] » Exterior rear-view mirrors: which were factory standard; door or wing mounted?

https://forum.triumphdolomite.co.uk/vie ... =4&t=34789

After approximately two years of regularly travelling to and from Cranfield at the weekends (i.e. Friday & Sunday evenings), over an 80 mile cross-country route, I had become wearied by not having a nearside, external rear-view door mirror (unlike our 1973 VW 1600 Type 2 campervan, on which it was a standard factory fitment), so it was fortunate that on one of my visits to Halfords, during autumn 1983, I came across a TEX brand, stainless-steel, nearside accessory door-mirror, of a similar pattern to my existing TEX, stainless-steel, offside door-mirror.

Although at first glance, the accessory mirror appeared almost identical, there were noticeable differences as follows:

• Convex, blue-tinted anti-dazzle lens, instead of plane, un-tinted lens;
• Black-plastic contoured mounting-gasket, instead of white-plastic gasket;
• Different shape of mirror-housing mounting base.

Recognising the advantage of having convex, blue-tinted anti-dazzle lenses and not wishing to have non-matching mirrors, I bought a matching pair of the TEX brand, stainless-steel, offside & nearside accessory door-mirrors and kept my original offside mirror as a spare. The details marked on the original packaging, were as follows:

TEX Parts Ltd.
Witney Trading Estate
Station Lane
Witney
Oxfordshire
OX8 6YD.

TEX ‘ANTI-DAZZLE’ Door Mirror
Part No. M68890 – –
RIGHT HAND CONVEX POLISHED

TEX ‘ANTI-DAZZLE’ Door Mirror
Part No. M68891 – –
LEFT HAND CONVEX POLISHED

With both of these fitted, I felt much more confident on the roads, having eliminated at least some of the rear-quarter blind-spots. The tinted anti-dazzle feature, was also much appreciated during night driving, when cars approaching from behind with their headlamps on main beam, had previously been the major source of glare - visual discomfort. Sometimes I experienced similar discomfort, from low winter-sun.

I would also have appreciated an interior rear-view mirror, with an anti-dazzle feature, but at that time was unaware that at least some Triumph Dolomite models were equipped with a “dipping” interior rear-view mirror, one of which I have since acquired.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

For my own interest, I recently did an Internet search to see what I could find regarding the TEX door mirrors. It appears that the same accessory door mirrors, with the same part numbers, fitted with convex, tinted mirror lenses, are still available. Not only that, but there are mirrors of the same type in black-painted finish, rather than polished stainless-steel, albeit with slightly different part numbers. One can also obtain spare parts for the mirrors.

https://www.motoringclassics.co.uk/part ... steel.html

https://www.motoringclassics.co.uk/inde ... 68891.html


https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B01ANT6DCQ/ ... 526_931641

https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B01ANTBQYQ/ ... 581_931857


http://texautomotive.com/classic.html

http://texautomotive.com/classic_exterior_mirrors.html

http://texautomotive.com/classic_mirror_spares.html

http://texautomotive.com/mirror_glass.html

The TEX company’s current contact details, are as follows:

Tex Automotive Limited
Cotswold Business Park
Range Road
Witney
Oxfordshire
OX29 0YB
England

Tel: +44 (0)1993 893500

Fax: +44 (0)1993 707222

Email: info@texautomotive.com

Website: http://texautomotive.com

[naskeet]

Substituted 7-inch Lucas 20-20 Homofocal Front Fog Lamps – January 1983

In contrast to my home region of South East Essex, I frequently encountered extremely foggy conditions, in Bedfordshire, in circa February and November, when driving my Triumph Toledo, during my postgraduate engineering studies at Cranfield, from October 1980 to May 1984.

The original “matched” pair of Lucas Square-8 fog & spot lamps (i.e. one of each), that had been retro-fitted below the front bumper, by Mann Egerton in Leigh-on-Sea, Essex, sometime prior to my father purchasing the car in May 1975, had proved to be ineffective as fog lamps, on previous occasions when fog lamps would have been useful. This was why I later reassigned the single Lucas Square-8 fog lamp, to be a supplementary reversing lamp mounted onto the underside of the rear bumper-bracket and put the single Lucas Square-8 spot lamp in storage.

Sometime earlier from an article-reprint I had acquired, I learned of Lucas 20/20 Homofocal, 7 inch diameter, front fog lamps and auxiliary driving lamps which were reviewed in the British motoring magazine “Motor” (see David Windsor & Maurice Rowe, "A British Lamp to Beat the World", Motor, week ending 8th November 1980), comparing them with well known, rival products from Bosch, Hella, Cibie and Wipac.

On the basis of that rave review and the fact that these lamps (albeit with H3 100W bulbs) had been adopted by the British international-car-rally team, I bought a pair of Lucas 20/20 fog lamps (Lucas part No. 55423 12V) from the local branch of Halfords, for the princely sum of £18 each. Two years earlier, the recommended retail price (as quoted in the 8th November issue of Motor magazine) was £26•00. To protect the lamps from stone-impact damage when the lamps were not in use, I also bought a pair of moulded-plastic Lucas 20/20 lamp covers (Lucas part No. etc LAB204 | 60840923 | COVER | 1082 Y) at the same time, priced at £2•99 each which seemed rather excessive for a single injection-moulded-plastic item!

Fitting the moulded-plastic lamp covers was easy, but removing them was quite challenging, especially when the plastic was cold and stiff. Consequently, if there was any significant risk of fog, I tended to leave the lamp covers off. This policy resulted in one of the fog-lamp’s glass lens being broken by a stone impact a few years later. With hindsight, I would have preferred some wire-mesh protectors and/or some easily-removable, elasticated, padded, fabric lamp covers (e.g. yellow or black nylon fabric with a Triumph laurel-leaf emblem); both of which I am considering for the future.

When I later revisited Halfords, with the intention of hopefully purchasing a replacement front fog lamp, I discovered that not only did they still have some in stock, but they were having a heavily-discounted clearance sale of both the Lucas 20/20 fog lamps and auxiliary driving lamps, so I bought one of the former and two of the latter.

I was unimpressed with the lamp mounting brackets retro-fitted by Mann Egerton, to mount the “matched” pair of Lucas Square-8 fog & spot lamps. They were simply L-shaped brackets that were bolted to the outboard sections of the front bumper brackets and didn’t position the lamps as I would wish.

Instead, I chose to have circa 25 mm wide strips of 3 mm thick steel-plate, welded between both sides of the bumper brackets, flush with the bottoms of the brackets and parallel to the underside trailing edge of the front bumper, which proved to be a very neat and secure form of fog-lamp mounting. This was the same configuration that I later used for the mounting bracket on the offside rear-bumper bracket, to mount the previously mentioned supplementary Lucas Square-8 auxiliary reversing light.

I thus fitted below the front bumper, a matched pair, of 7 inch, Lucas 20-20, homofocal, rally fog lamps (with standard H3 55W quartz halogen bulbs), which were to prove indispensable, over the next few years.

I found that my Lucas 20-20 fog lamps, gave kerb to kerb, lateral illumination, from 5 metres in front of the car and projected a flat horizontal beam (with sharp vertical cut-off), over a distance of at least 50 metres; even in quite thick fog, with virtually no reflected glare.





The advantages of good quality fog lamps (used in conjunction with the side lights, but with the headlamps switched off), are particularly noticeable at night, of which I had a graphic demonstration, on my way home from Cranfield to Canvey Island, via the A507, out of Stotfold towards Baldock, one Friday evening, as I approached the large roundabout, forming the junction between the A507 and A1. A car, using dipped headlamps, some distance in front of me, struck the inner kerb of the roundabout, which together with the roundabout's outer kerb, I could clearly see at that moment, with the aid of my Lucas 20-20 fog lamps.

As a consequence of driving relatively long distances in fog, I discovered the insidious effect of a thin film of minute water droplets (similar in size to what would be produced by an atomiser) building up on the external surface of the windscreen. The effect is to give the impression that the fog itself is becoming increasing dense, but more often than not, the decrease in visibility is associated with increasing temporary opacity of the windscreen, as a result of increasing water-droplet build-up.

Hence, it is important to regularly use one’s windscreen wipers to clear the water-droplet build-up, for which just a single sweep is usually all that is needed. This was something for which the flick-wipe facility of steering-column mounted windscreen wiper & washer switch (substituted from a Triumph Dolomite), proved to be particularly useful. However this relies on constantly being alert to changing visibility and realising the need to use the windscreen wipers, for which the cognitive burden can be potentially reduced, by having an after-market, rain-sensing wiper-controller, such as the OEDES Raintracker™ RT-50 & RT-50A kit. The following magazine article reviews the associated literature.

Nigel A. Skeet, "Rain Tracker RT-50, Universal, Rain-Sensing, Automatic Windscreen-Wiper Controller", Transporter Talk, Issue 77, June 2005, Pages 38~43.

The positioning and operation of front fog lamps, for vehicles of various vintages, are covered in the Road Vehicles’ Lighting Regulations as follows:

The Road Vehicles Lighting Regulations 1989, UK Statutory Instruments 1989, No. 1796

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1989 ... tents/made

The Road Vehicles Lighting Regulations 1989, UK Statutory Instruments 1989, No. 1796, SCHEDULE 6

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1989 ... ule/6/made

At the time I undertook the substitution of the Lucas 20/20 front fog lights in 1983, I did not have access to the then current edition of the Road Vehicles Lighting Regulations, but I did possess the following book and various AA information leaflets:

Marcus Jacobson (Consulting Editor), “AA Book of Driving”, Automobile Association, 1980, ISBN 0-86145-021-3.

In the following section of the book, it states:

Winter driving accessories – Living with the car - Lights, Page 177.

« Fog gives rise to the most worrying visibility difficulties. Special fog lights, whose beam is very wide but cut off at the top to reduce back-scatter, are widely available. The light may be white or amber, according to choice. »

As implied earlier, the electrical circuit I adopted for my front fog lamps, was to take the live feed for the fog-lamp switch, from that for the sidelights, as recommended in the Lucas Fitting Instructions (Fog and Spot Lamps for Cars and Commercial Vehicles – Use of Fog or Spot Lamps in the U.K.* | Publication No. PLT6141C, dated October 1981). Had I unwisely taken the live feed for the fog-lamp switch, from that for the headlamp dipped-beam, as is required in some countries like the USA, both the front fog lights and headlamp dipped-beams would operate together, negating all of the advantages of fitting the front fog lights!

Given that the two front fog lamps were both fitted with H3 55W quartz-halogen bulbs, requiring a total of at least 9•2 A @ 12 V or as much as 11•0 A @ 14•4 V (i.e. maximum “advisable” regulated alternator voltage, charging a 12 V lead-acid battery), the load-current for the lamps was supplied directly from an independently-fused battery supply, via a 30 A relay, mounted on the left-hand side of the engine compartment, close to the battery.

By the winter of 1982/83, I had already substituted the Dolomite HL adjustable steering column with associated switches and moulded black-plastic nacelle. Having ample space for at least three more switches in this nacelle, I elected to fit a double-throw toggle switch (salvaged second-hand headlamp switch) on the left-hand side of the nacelle, to serve both the front & rear fog lamps.

[naskeet]

Retro-Fitted a Lucas Square-8 Supplementary Reversing Lamp – Autumn 1983

By the autumn of 1983, I had become increasingly frustrated by my inability to see adequately, to reverse at night in an unlit driveway or car park, using the pair of dealership-fitted Lumax reversing lamps, with 20W festoon bulbs, that were panel-mounted immediately below the rear combination lamp clusters. This was a particularly acute problem in the pitch-black, crowded car park, to the rear of Lanchester Hall, at Cranfield Institute of Technology, to which I returned from home late on Sunday evenings.

Consequently, I decided to retro-fit the surplus Lucas Square-8 front fog lamp, as a supplementary high-intensity reversing lamp. To fit this lamp, I had the option of mounting it either (a) onto the underside of the rear bumper, (b) mounting it to the bodywork by means of a custom bracket, or (c) onto the offside rear bumper bracket by means of a custom bracket. It wouldn’t be practical to mount the lamp onto the nearside rear bumper bracket, owing to the presence of the rear exhaust tailpipe. I didn’t like options (a) & (b), but option (c) seemed to be the most practical and avoided drilling holes in either the rear bumper or bodywork.

Consequently, I chose to have circa 25 mm wide strips of 3 mm thick steel-plate, welded between both sides of the bumper bracket, flush with the bottom of the bracket and parallel to the underside trailing edge of the front bumper, which proved to be a very neat and secure form of lamp mounting. This was the same configuration that I previously used for the lamp-mounting brackets on the front-bumper brackets, to mount the pair of Lucas 20/20 Homofocal front fog lamps.

To minimise the likelihood of the supplementary reversing lamp being left on by mistake, I adopted an electrical circuit, whereby by the supplementary manual reversing-light switch, took its positive electrical supply from the sidelights and a tell-tale lamp incorporated in the switch-bracket below the Toledo dashboard, showed when the supplementary reversing lamp was switched on.

Several months later in March 1984, when I purchased and substituted the early-model Triumph Dolomite 1850 dashboard, I used a yellow-lensed tell-tale lamp, that was one of those that were otherwise unallocated in the 60 mm diameter, Lucas 6WL 8-segment warning light cluster, in the centre of the convex instrument panel. Owing to the human eyes’ high sensitivity to yellow light, yellow tell-tale or warning lights in one’s main zone of vision, are difficult to overlook.

Board index » The Triumph Dolomite Club » Dolomite-related [Start here!] » Customising Lucas 60 mm, 8-Segment, Warning-Light Clusters

viewtopic.php?f=4&t=29490

With hindsight, it might have been better to have incorporated an .AND. logic gate, so that the supplementary reversing lamp would only illuminate when the sidelights (or alternatively the dipped headlamps) and the dealership-fitted accessory Lumax 20W reversing lamps were both illuminated. This is an upgrade, together with an accessory relay, which I might incorporate in the future. It might also be beneficial to substitute a modern low-power, high-intensity LED bulb with H3 mounting flange, into the Lucas Square-8 lamp.

When the Lucas Square-8, H3 55W quartz-halogen supplementary reversing lamp was not in use off-road in driveways and car parks, the opaque, moulded black-plastic lamp cover was fitted for reason of legality; it being contrary to the road-vehicle lighting regulations to show more than two white lights to the rear, especially of such high intensity. Unless I had used the lamp when on the brow of a hill, with the lamp facing uphill, there was never any danger of drivers being dazzled, owing to the low-height position of the lamp below the rear bumper and the alignment of the lamp to provide a low, flat light beam.

The positioning and operation of reversing lamps, for vehicles of various vintages, are covered in the Road Vehicles’ Lighting Regulations as follows:

The Road Vehicles Lighting Regulations 1989, UK Statutory Instruments 1989, No. 1796

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1989 ... tents/made

The Road Vehicles Lighting Regulations 1989, UK Statutory Instruments 1989, No. 1796, SCHEDULE 14

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/198 ... le/14/made

At the time I undertook the retro-fitment of a supplementary reversing light in 1983, I did not have access to the then current edition of the Road Vehicles Lighting Regulations, but I did possess the following book and various AA information leaflets:

Marcus Jacobson (Consulting Editor), “AA Book of Driving”, Automobile Association, 1980, ISBN 0-86145-021-3.

In the following section of the book, it states:

Winter driving accessories – Living with the car - Lights, Page 177.

« Reversing lights are another very useful accessory. No more than two should be fitted, and they can only be used when reversing. The use of a fog or spotlight for this purpose is prohibited. The bulbs in these lights should be no more than 24 watts in strength. Control of reversing lights is usually automatic from the gearbox. Where this is not the case, there must be a warning light on the dashboard or on the switch. »

[naskeet]

Toledo’s Indicated Fuel Economy Exceeds 40 Miles Per Gallon! – Late 1983

Browsing recently through my early-August 1983 to late-December 1984 Glaxo pocket diary, I noticed a few entries during September to November 1983, indicating fuel economy figures slightly in excess of 40•0 mpg, for 80•0 mile cross-country journeys; based upon odometer readings from the substitute Smiths speedometer (1970~74 Triumph Toledo style), that I had substituted into my Toledo on 3rd September 1983.

Saturday, 27th August 1983 – 34526 miles (full tank) 8•80 gallons, £15•80, ?•? mpg


Friday, 9th September 1983 – Emergency Spare Can 1•09 gallons, £2•00

Saturday, 10th September 1983 – 34946 miles (full tank) 9•36 gallons, £16•80, 40•2 mpg

Fuel consumption calculation: (34946 – 34526) / (9•36 + 1•09) = 40•19 mpg


Saturday, 23rd September 1983 – 35256 miles (full tank) 7•65 gallons, £13•81, 40•5 mpg

Fuel consumption calculation: (35256 – 34946) / 7•65 = 40•52 mpg


Sunday, 2nd October 1983 – 35440 miles (partially-filled tank) 4•45 gallons, £8•00

Sunday, 15th October 1983 – 35765 miles (full tank) 8•15 gallons, £14•77, 40•4 mpg

Fuel consumption calculation: (35765 – 35256) / (4•45 + 8•15) = 40•40 mpg


Friday, 28th October 1983 – 36096 miles (partially-filled tank) 6•63 gallons, £12•00

Saturday, 12th November 1983 – 36432 miles (full tank) 10•03 gallons, £18•00, 40•0 mpg

Fuel consumption calculation: (36432 – 35765) / (6•63 + 10•03) = 40•04 mpg


Checking the car’s hand-written maintenance records for 1982 to 1985, I found the following average fuel-consumption summary entries:

1974 Onward, BLMC Triumph Toledo 1300 HL, Diary of Servicing, Maintenance, Repair and Modification

Late-1982 (total mileage of 23,232 to 25,099 = 1867 miles travelled): Fuel consumption over long cross-country journeys (circa 80 miles) averaged at 38•2 mpg.

31st January 1983 to 10th July 1983 (total mileage of 29,232 to 33,359 = 4127 miles travelled): Fuel consumption over mixed journeys (2 x 81 + 4 x 6½ miles) averaged at 37•8 mpg.

10th July 1983 to 23rd December 1983 (total mileage of 33,359 to 37,366 => 4007 miles travelled): Fuel consumption over long cross-country journey (circa 80 miles) averaged at 39•0 mpg.

During the latter half of this five-month period, the 36,000 mile service had been undertaken during the three-week period of 22nd October 1983 to 13th November 1983 (total mileage of 35,941 to 36,436).

27th August 1983 to 12th November 1983 (total mileage of 34,526 to 36,432 = 1910 miles travelled): Fuel consumption over long cross-country journey (circa 80 miles) averaged at 40•3 mpg.

23rd December 1983 to 18th May 1984 (total mileage of 37,366 to 40,255 = 2889 miles travelled): Fuel consumption over long cross-country journey (circa 80 miles) averaged at 39•4 mpg.

11th July 1984 to 5th November 1984 (total mileage of 40,601 to 42,903 = 2302 miles travelled): Fuel consumption over commuter route (circa 16 miles) averaged at 37•0 mpg.

5th November 1984 to 28th March 1985 (total mileage of 42,903 to 46,305 = 3402 miles travelled): Fuel consumption over commuter route (circa 16 miles) averaged at 35•8 mpg.

28th March 1985 to 2nd July 1985 (total mileage of 46,305 to 47,761 = 1456 miles travelled): Fuel consumption over commuter route (circa 16 miles) averaged at 38•4 mpg.

10th June 1985 to 26th September 1985 (total mileage of 47,165 to 49,711 = 2546 miles travelled): Fuel consumption over commuter route (circa 16 miles) averaged at 39•3 mpg.

These fuel-economy figures are probably not attainable by factory-standard, 1970~76 Triumph Toledo 1300 cars, but by then, my 1974 Triumph Toledo 1300 was no longer of factory-standard specification!

The factory-standard V-belt driven cooling fan had continuously robbed the engine of power; often cooling it when it didn’t need cooling, especially during the initial warm-up phase to a low “normal” operating temperature. Having dispensed with the power-robbing V-belt driven cooling fan and substituted a thermostatically-controlled electric cooling fan, the engine could warm-up more rapidly to a higher “normal” operating temperature and be cooled only when needed; significantly improving fuel economy, especially on short journeys in cold weather.

It might be interesting to note, that in the post-1990 sales brochure for the British made Kenlowe HOTSTART© HS4 engine/interior pre-heating system for cars, Kenlowe present a bar-graph of test data, said to show the excess fuel used during warm up on a typical family saloon using a standard automatic choke, with the test carried out at an average speed of 45 mph and a relatively mild ambient air temperature of 15 ºC. At distances of 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 & 9 miles from cold start, the excess fuel used during stages of the warm-up period, claimed by Kenlowe, was illustrated to be 46%, 42%, 35%, 30%, 25%, 21%, 17%, 14% & 12% respectively.

The other significant non-standard factor, was the fact of running on 5½ x 13 inch alloy wheels with 175 SR13 tyres (not 175/70 SR13 tyres!), which had a rolling circumference that was about 5•5% larger than that of 155 SR13 tyres which would have been fitted to the original factory-fitted 4 x 13 inch steel wheels. Later experience with 185/70 R13 tyres on the same 5½ x 13 inch alloy wheels, indicated that running the larger-circumference 175 SR13 tyres was giving a real improvement in fuel-economy of about 11%; once I had taken into account the consequent change in speedometer & odometer calibration.

This large change in fuel-consumption rate associated with just a change in effective engine gearing of circa 5•5% surprised me, but it reflects observations made by A. Graham Bell, in his book entitled “How to Tune Modern Generation Engines for Power & Economy”!

Using the 175 SR13 (assumed to be 175/83 SR13) tyres with my 1974 Triumph Toledo 1300’s 4•11:1 final-drive ratio, gives virtually the same overall effective gearing (typically expressed in terms of MPH per 1000 engine-RPM) as the original factory-standard 155 SR13 (assumed to be 155/83 SR13) or 185/70 SR13 tyres, with a 3•89:1 final-drive ratio as used for the Triumph Toledo 1500, Triumph 1500TC and Triumph Dolomite 1500 & 1500 HL with manual transmission.

It’s interesting to note, that on Pages 113 & 115, of the following archived classic-car motoring magazine review from early 2010 (i.e. circa 11½ years ago), of the Triumph Dolomite range, that I found on-line some time ago, this modification re final-drive ratio substitution for a Triumph Dolomite 1300, is actually suggested!

Rob Marshall & Gez Hughes, “How to Buy a Triumph Dolomite”, Classics Monthly, February 2010, Pages 112~115 & 117~118.

http://docstrend.com/file/2KL/triumph-dolomite.html

« Practicality: What can’t it do? – Dolomite 1300 and 1500 cars are both under-geared and stressed at motorway speeds. The 1500 engines may be damaged by sustained high-speed journeys unless an overdrive gearbox is fitted. »

« Worthy Upgrades – Twin carbs, exhaust and 1500 differential to 1300 »

However, the article makes no reference to the change in fuel economy, but merely the reduced engine revs at cruising speed. It also fails to make clear whether the intention is to substitute a Triumph Dolomite 1500 / 1500HL early-model rear axle with the 3•89:1 final-drive ratio, or a late-model rear axle with the 3•63:1 final-drive ratio, that had previously been used for the Triumph Dolomite 1850 / 1850HL.

I have already established the fuel-economy advantages of using a rear axle with the 3•89:1 final-drive ratio in a Triumph Toledo 1300, but whether substituting a rear axle with the 3•63:1 final-drive ratio as “ragtop” has done, would further improve fuel economy or detract from it, has yet to be determined.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Board index » The Triumph Dolomite Club » Restoration Projects » 1972 Toledo

viewtopic.php?f=19&t=20141&start=75

viewtopic.php?f=19&t=20141&p=316830&hil ... ve#p316813

I am on 175/70x13 and I have fitted a spitfire 1500 diff 3•65. It has a lot lower revs at 60 mph

viewtopic.php?f=19&t=20141&p=316830&hil ... ve#p316830

How would you characterise the car's changes in performance, hill-climbing ability, top speed and fuel economy, as a consequence of changing the final-drive ratio from 4•11:1 to 3•65:1 (or is it actually 3•63:1); keeping in mind the change in odometer calibration and associated accuracy (not precision which remains unchanged)?

Board index » The Triumph Dolomite Club » Dolomite-related [Start here!] > Talk to me about Final Drives......

viewtopic.php?f=4&t=33933

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

In my Triumph Toledo literature archive, are some handwritten notes dating from the early-1980s, pertaining to UK Government published, official petrol-consumption data pertaining to the various Triumph Dolomite models with 4-speed manual or 4-speed manual & OD - overdrive, for (a) simulated urban cycle, (b) constant 56 mph, and (c) constant 75 mph:

Model / Driving Conditions | Urban | 56 mph | 75 mph

Dolomite 1300 (manual) | 27•2 mpg | 43•9 mpg | 28•3 mpg

Dolomite 1500 (manual) | 26•1 mpg | 43•1 mpg | 28•0 mpg

Dolomite 1500 (manual & OD) | 26•1 mpg | 46•9 mpg | 30•9 mpg

Dolomite 1850 (manual) | 30•3 mpg | 40•4 mpg | 29•1 mpg

Dolomite 1850 (manual & OD) | 30•3 mpg | 46•7 mpg | 31•6 mpg

Dolomite Sprint (manual & OD) | 23•4 mpg | 40•4 mpg | 31•9 mpg

As we have all probably found from personal experience, the prevailing road and traffic conditions seldom allow one to consistently cruise at a constant speed, over any significant time period or distance, so petrol-consumption figures for constant 56 mph or 75 mph are somewhat academic, although they do give some basis for comparison. Typically attained average petrol-consumption figures, tend to lie somewhere between those obtained for the urban cycle and a constant 56 mph.

Unless one does a lot of long-distance high-speed (i.e. 60~70 mph) cruising on the motorways, the best model choices re fuel-economy, would seem to be the Dolomite 1850 (manual & OD) as first choice, with roughly joint second choices being either the Dolomite 1850 (manual), Dolomite 1500 (manual & OD) or Dolomite 1300 (manual). Third and fourth choices would be the Dolomite 1500 (manual) and Dolomite Sprint (manual & OD) respectively.

Given that the Triumph Toledo 1300 & 1500 model ceased production before the introduction of the UK Government sanctioned, official fuel-consumption evaluation, I have no basis for comparison with the Triumph Dolomite 1300 & 1500 models. Unless the long-bodied Triumph Dolomite 1300 & 1500 models have a lower aerodynamic drag coefficient than the short-bodied Triumph Toledo 1300 & 1500 models, I would expect the Toledos to exhibit slightly better fuel economy, owing to their lesser kerb weight.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

On Tuesday, 16th November 2021, at 9:05 pm on Freeview Channel 81 – Talking Pictures, I saw a circa 15 minute, archived promotional film for GKN Laycock dating from 1968, entitled “MGB on Overdrive”, featuring a G-suffix registered MGB GT, which was tested for fuel consumption under the supervision of the RAC – Royal Automobile Club, for which the claimed results of using overdrive at speeds in excess of 35 mph were an average reduction of 16% in fuel consumption; that in simple terms was described as a saving of one in six gallons of petrol (corresponding to 16•66%).

[naskeet]

Replaced a Faulty Fuel-Gauge Sender Unit – Autumn 1983

At some time during Autumn 1983, the Toledo’s fuel gauge had ceased to function. I have no written record of the test procedure used, but by some means I had deduced that the fuel-gauge sender in the fuel tank was faulty, and replaced it with a nearly-new (as indicated by the lack of patina) second-hand unit salvaged from a Triumph Toledo 1300 or Dolomite 13/1500 at a local car breaker’s yard.

[naskeet]

Replaced Front-Suspension, Upper & Lower Wishbone Bushes – Autumn 1983

Details to be appended in due course!

[naskeet]

Substituted Early-Model Triumph Dolomite 1850 Dashboard & Instruments - March 1984

Having already substituted a “four-headlamp” Triumph Dolomite adjustable steering column & steering wheel, plus associated switch-gear and nacelle during the winter of 1982/83, I started to think during late 1983 about also substituting a “four-headlamp” Triumph Dolomite sculptured dashboard with associated additional instrument-functions, 8-segment warning-light cluster and time-clock.

Board index » The Triumph Dolomite Club » The Public Bar - General Chat » “Factory-Standard, Alternative & Supplementary Instruments”

viewtopic.php?f=5&t=29524

To fit a large number of individual warning-light units, is often impractical, invariably untidy and might not be sited for optimum visibility. In many cases, these deficiencies may be overcome by fitting one or more warning-light clusters, such as that made by Lucas Industries Ltd., in Great Britain, which was original equipment for the Triumph Stag (a few exported to the USA), Triumph 1300, 1300TC, 1500, 1500TC, 2000 & 2500, Triumph Dolomite 1500HL, 1850, 1850HL & Sprint. The base plate cum circuit-board with bulb holders and electrical-connection pins with matching black, thermo-set plastic connector-block, are available with at least two different electrical-connection pin configurations.

Board index » The Triumph Dolomite Club » Dolomite-related [Start here!] » Customising Lucas 60 mm, 8-Segment, Warning-Light Clusters

viewtopic.php?f=4&t=29490

In addition to the sculptured dashboards being of a more attractive style, I felt that this would probably be easier, than trying to adapt the Triumph Toledo’s existing “straight-plank” style dashboard, to incorporate a 105 mm tachometer and a 52 mm voltmeter, plus various additional tell-tale & warning lights.

Triumph Toledo (early) standard dashboard

http://tse3.mm.bing.net/th?id=OIP.M4ee8 ... 0&pid=15.1

Although the “four-headlamp” FWD Triumph 1500 and RWD Triumph 1500TC sculptured dashboard, is of the same style as that of “four-headlamp” Triumph Dolomites, the instrument package offers only the addition of a voltmeter and three extra warning lights compared to that of the 1970~76 Triumph Toledo. Whereas the Toledo incorporates its 5 = 3+2 warning lights into the two 105 mm instrument housings (i.e. three in the speedometer and two in the water-temperature & fuel gauge cluster), the “four-headlamp” Triumph 1500TC & Dolomites house their 8 warning lights in a single 8-segment, 60 mm diameter warning-light cluster.

The Triumph 1500 & 1500TC lack both a 105 mm tachometer and a 60 mm diameter time-clock, but have a 105 mm speedometer (no integral warning lights) and a single 105 mm instrument housing (no integral warning lights), incorporating a cluster of water-temperature gauge, fuel gauge & voltmeter, as can be seen in the FWD Triumph 1300/1500 workshop manual and the following topic thread.

FWD Triumph 1500 instrument panel



RWD Triumph 1500TC literature - dashboard



John Millward, Triumph 1300/1500 from 1965 ~ 1973, Car Repair Manual, Autodata, 1980, ACRM277, ISBN 0-85666-049-3 – Fig. M:21 Details of the facia attachment and associated components on 1500 models, Body Fittings section, Page 145

Board index » The Triumph Dolomite Club » Restoration Projects » Triumph 1500TC Now A Rolling Resto Most Photo's Restored

https://forum.triumphdolomite.co.uk/vie ... 19&t=13940

https://forum.triumphdolomite.co.uk/vie ... 15#p137426



https://forum.triumphdolomite.co.uk/vie ... 80#p210578







In contrast, the “four-headlamp” Triumph Dolomites’ dashboard & instrument panel, features a 105 mm speedometer (no integral warning lights), 105 mm tachometer (no integral warning lights), 52 mm water-temperature gauge, 52 mm fuel gauge, 52 mm voltmeter, 60 mm 8-segment warning-light cluster & 60 mm time-clock (located in the small separate panel, to the left of the heating & ventilation control levers); providing two additional instrument functions and a time-clock, compared to that of the Triumph Toledo.

Triumph Dolomite (early) Dashboard



1972 Triumph Dolomite 1850 literature - dashboard etc



I liked the 1970~74 Triumph Toledo style instrumentation, but wasn’t particularly keen on the more modern-style instruments fitted to the 1975~76 Triumph Toledos, 1975 Triumph 1500TC and 1975~80 Triumph Dolomites. However, the instruments of the early-model Triumph Dolomite 1850, were similar to those of my 1974 Triumph Toledo; albeit with a different style of centre-hub & pointer for the speedometer and tachometer, which could probably be replaced with a centre-hub & pointer of the same style as the 1970~74 Toledo speedometer.

I was also uncertain in those days about the relative calibration of the speedometers and their drive mechanisms, that were fitted to the various Dolomite 1500HL, 1850, 1850HL & 2000 Sprint models, whose transmission final-drive ratios differed from the 4•11:1 of the Triumph Toledo 1300. The Toledo 1300 and Dolomite 1850 speedometers had calibrated speed scales of 0~100 mph & 0~160 km/h and 0~120 mph & 0~190 km/h respectively. Given that a factory-standard Triumph Toledo 1300 probably has a maximum speed of less than 85 mph, there would be no useful purpose in using a speedometer whose calibrated scale extended beyond 100 mph.

British specification, 1974 Triumph Toledo 1300's Smith's speedometer



Besides that, the statutory maximum speed limits in most if not all European countries, are either 70 mph, 110 km/h (i.e. 68¾ mph) or 130 km/h (i.e. 81¼ mph), so unless one intended to race a modified, souped-up Triumph Toledo on a private track, off the public highway, this is another reason why a speedometer scale extending beyond 100 mph & 160 km/h would be superfluous! The Triumph GT6’s 140 mph dial face, is even less appropriate to a Triumph Toledo 1300; 140 mph being exactly twice the British statutory maximum speed limit of 70 mph, so only half of the speedometer’s scale would ever be used!

My Ideal Dashboard & Instrument Combination

Hence, I deduced that the ideal solution would be to fit an early-model Triumph Dolomite 1850 dashboard (complete with its associated instrumentation), and substitute my original 1970~74 Triumph Toledo style speedometer in place of the Triumph Dolomite 1850 speedometer. This would have the added advantage of retaining the three integral warning lights for ignition (i.e. alternator voltage), low-oil-pressure and headlamp main beam, that were incorporated into the Toledo speedometer; using just two of the warning-light segments in the Dolomite’s 8-segment warning-light cluster for the left-hand & right-hand direction-indicator tell-tale lights, leaving six warning-light segments for other existing or future planned applications, such as:

1) Rear fog lights
2) Front fog lights
3) Heated rear window
4) Auxiliary driving lights
5) Trailer direction-indicator function
6) Supplementary, high-intensity reversing lights

In late-November or early-December 1983, I learned that an early-model Triumph Dolomite 1850 dashboard was available for sale at a small car breaker’s yard in Buckinghamshire, not far from CIT – Cranfield. Hence, on Wednesday, 7th December 1983, I purchased for £20•00, a complete early-model Triumph Dolomite 1850 dashboard, including instruments (i.e. speedometer, tachometer, fuel gauge, water-temperature gauge, voltmeter, time-clock, instrument-illumination dimming potentiometer & 8-segment warning-light cluster), heated rear-window switch with integral tell-tale light (identical to that in my Triumph Toledo), hazard warning light system with central rocker switch, and plastic windscreen-demisting duct & metal grille. The dashboard had already been removed from the donor vehicle, so I didn’t have the opportunity to see how this interfaced with other systems in the car!

The 1974 Triumph Toledo didn’t have a hazard warning light system, so having the complete switch, relay & wiring from the Triumph Dolomite 1850 was an added bonus. Having a time-clock in a style that complemented the other instrumentation was also a nice added extra, which negated the need to look at my wrist watch that would be more hazardous when driving.

In common with my 1974 Triumph Toledo’s original dashboard, the early-model Triumph Dolomite 1850’s dashboard, had brackets fastened to the underside, for the speedometer’s trip-counter, remote-control zeroing cable & knob, and the heated rear-window’s dashboard switch with integral tell-tale light. Neither of these are a feature of late-model Dolomite dashboards, which have a plain square-knobbed on/off switch (no integral tell-tale light) in the instrument panel for the heated rear-window and the speedometer trip-counter’s zeroing knob, protrudes through the speedometer lens.

Sadly the Dolomite 1850 tachometer was non-functional for a reason I have yet to discover, despite correctly matching the electrical connections for this early-type tachometer, as given in the photocopied Triumph Dolomite Sprint electrical-circuit diagram that I had obtained from Mark Tothill! I had hoped to use this tachometer with a spare centre-hub & pointer, substituted from a defunct, early-Toledo speedometer, to closely match the style of my 1974 Toledo speedometer.

I also hoped to incorporate into the tachometer, three or more integral warning-light holders, from two defunct early-Toledo speedometers, but I have yet to find a way to do this. If I had discarded the non-functional tachometer, I could have retained my Toledo’s original 105 mm instrument housing, incorporating the fuel gauge, water-temperature gauge and two direction-indicator warning lights. Alternatively, one could substitute a FWD Triumph 1300’s 105 mm instrument housing of the same style (albeit with a chromium-plated bezel), which also incorporates an ammeter.

This would have made two of the 52 mm instrument-panel apertures available for two supplementary gauges, for functions such as oil-pressure, oil-temperature, inlet-manifold vacuum or electrical current (i.e. ammeter); four additional functions I intend to have in the future, in my new substitute, custom-made, curved-profile instrument panel, as well as finally having a functional 105 mm tachometer of some sort.

« Steve Boitoult wrote: Alastair Cox Its NOT easy or quick to sub the curved dash into a flat dash car. The mounts at the screen interface are different, the heater unit itself is different and the steering column support bracket is different, besides the already mentioned wiring loom, switchgear and parcel tray alterations required. »

« If you're going to do it (and it HAS been done by a number of owners in the UK) it's best to have a donor car handy and get EVERYTHING you can from it, dash, heater, column, loom, parcel tray, vent and speaker panels etc and be prepared to make up the screen area mounts as you go, or drill out the spot welds and replace the mount panel! »

« A further complication for you is that the loom you would need for a 1300 (or 1500) engined car is the one from a 1500HL, which I gather is not available in NZ. »

Changes in Electrical Wiring

Contrary to Steve Boitoult’s comments some time ago in the Facebook Triumph Toledo interest group, to Alistair Cox in Wellington, New Zealand, adapting the Triumph Toledo 1300’s or 1500's existing electrical wiring system to incorporate a “four-headlamp” Dolomite’s sculptured dashboard & instruments, is not fundamentally difficult, but it does necessitate a methodical approach to reconfiguring the electrical connections, and changing as necessary, which connection pins & sockets are inserted into which multi-way connector blocks; including the possible substitution of alternative multi-way connector blocks with a different number of pins & sockets.

It was certainly unnecessary to substitute a Triumph Dolomite 1500HL’s complete wiring loom as Steve suggested, but there might be some advantage to doing this, if one also intends to substitute a 1500 engine’s pre-engaged starter motor and/or substitute a four-headlamp system and/or implement the warning / tell-tale light facilities for low fuel level, carburettor choke employed, handbrake engaged & brake-circuit failure.

I have since acquired in 2018, a late-model, 1979/80 Triumph Dolomite 1500HL Automatic’s complete wiring loom (including rear fog-lamp wiring, that appears to be red / blue; contrary to the provisions of BS-AU7a, which states that this colour code would be used for a front fog light fuse to a fog light switch), which in the future, I might use in whole or in part, together with various supplementary electrical cables, to facilitate intended future upgrades.

During the 1980s, I certainly salvaged those sections of a “four-headlamp” Dolomite wiring loom, that connected switches, relays, gauges and the warning-light cluster to the main wiring loom; including the almost-essential, black, thermoset-plastic (possibly “Bakelite” or something similar), bespoke, circular, multi-way connector block (with captive female copper connectors, which are removable and reusable for customisation purposes), which fits onto the back of the warning-light cluster. However, substituting a complete wiring loom, is not for the faint-hearted or those who are inexperienced in automotive electrical wiring circuits and wiring colours.

Given that in early-1984, I was still using my Triumph Toledo 1300 every Friday & Sunday evening, to travel between Canvey Island and CIT – Cranfield, I needed to complete the process in self-contained stages and finally complete the transformation, by simply disconnecting (i.e. unplugging) the multi-way connector blocks to the original Toledo dashboard and reconnecting the same multi-way connector blocks to the substitute Dolomite dashboard’s & instrument panel’s wiring and multi-way connector blocks. This approach would also enable quick & easy removal of the complete Dolomite dashboard & instrument panel, without removing any individual switch, relay or instrument wiring connections, if and when future maintenance or modification work was required!

It was impractical (and maybe impossible) to reconfigure the early-model cars’ flexible, grey-elastomer, multi-way connector blocks with moulded-in male & female connectors, but the later clear-plastic, multi-way connector blocks (possibly made by Rists; a constituent company of Lucas Industries) can be readily reconfigured, by depressing with a narrow-bladed electrical or instrument screw-driver, the retaining barbs of the captive male & female brass connectors and removing them from the connector blocks.

Board index » The Triumph Dolomite Club » Dolomite-related [Start here!] » Lucas Rists terminals

https://forum.triumphdolomite.co.uk/vie ... =4&t=36869

During 1982~84, at local car breakers’ yards, I salvaged a selection of several second-hand clear-plastic and some similar coloured-plastic (typically black, but possibly red and green as well), multi-way connector-blocks of various sizes (i.e. 1-way, 2-way, 3-way, 5-way, 7-way & 9-way) from other Triumph Toledo and/or Dolomite cars.

Some later BLMC cars (e.g. Austin-Rover Metro, Maestro & Montego) had multi-way connector-blocks with an even greater number of captive connectors and were also sources of 1-way and 6-way relay mounting cum connector blocks.

Six-position, relay mounting cum connector block (ex Austin Montego)





Single-position, relay mounting cum connector blocks (ex Austin Montego and/or Maestro and/or Metro and Vauxhall Cavalier Mk.2)



I have some white, black & red 20-way connector-blocks, from one or more BLMC cars, but I have yet to attempt removing the brass connectors and recycling them. Further investigation of currently available, multi-way connector blocks, revealed that these are Lucas-Rists TTS connectors, coloured either black, white, red or blue, in 3-way, 5-way, 7-way, 9-way & 20-way forms; stocked by 3 Way Components, in Luton, Bedfordshire. It appears that the captive brass connector pins & sockets are identical or very similar to those used in the Toledo & Dolomite.

https://www.3waycomponents.co.uk

https://www.3waycomponents.co.uk/Automotive-Connectors

https://www.3waycomponents.co.uk/Automo ... Connectors

https://www.3waycomponents.co.uk/Automo ... ector-Kits

https://www.3waycomponents.co.uk/Automo ... r-Housings

https://www.3waycomponents.co.uk/Automo ... eeper-Bars

https://www.3waycomponents.co.uk/Automo ... -Terminals

Some of the multi-way connector blocks that I salvaged, were used when I reconfigured the wiring for the main lighting switch and windscreen wiper & washer switch, in order to substitute the Dolomite HL adjustable steering column with associated nacelle & switches during Winter 1982/83. At that time, I was unaware of any sources of replacement brass connectors, so I carefully un-crimped the salvaged ones using a narrow screw-driver blade and reused them.

I believe these or similar multi-way connector-blocks and associated connectors are still available new, from various auto-electrical components suppliers such as Vehicle Wiring Products, Automotive Connectors, Auto Electric Supplies, Auto Electrical Spares, Car Builder Solutions, 12 Volt Planet and Polevolt etc.

https://www.vehiclewiringproducts.co.uk

https://www.automotiveconnectors.com/

https://www.autoelectricsupplies.co.uk/

https://www.autoelectricalspares.co.uk

www.carbuildersolutions.com

https://www.12voltplanet.co.uk

http://polevolt.co.uk/

In particular, Auto Electrical Spares list Lucas CWB multi-way connector blocks, of the same or similar pattern to those used on the late-model Triumph Dolomites. The male & female plastic mouldings (into which the captive pins & sockets are inserted) are available in 1-way, 2-way, 3-way, 4-way, 5-way, 7-way & 9-way versions. The plastic mouldings, plus the individual pins and sockets to be inserted, are sold separately. Compared to my full carrier-bag job-lot of multi-way connector blocks and other electrical-system components, bought second-hand from the local car breaker’s yard, these seem horrendously expensive!

https://www.autoelectricalspares.co.uk/ ... -127-c.asp

Replacement Lucas-Rists male & female captive brass connectors that appear to be of the same type, that fit within the moulded-plastic multi-way connector blocks used in the Triumph Toledos & Dolomites, are available from Automotive Connectors.

https://www.automotiveconnectors.com/co ... ls/page/3/

https://www.automotiveconnectors.com/lu ... 16awg.html

https://www.automotiveconnectors.com/lu ... minal.html

https://www.automotiveconnectors.com/lu ... 16awg.html

Historically, I can recall a listing of the same or similar multi-way connector blocks in the paper catalogues (I have at least one from the 1990s archived somewhere!) published by Vehicle Wiring Products, but I can no longer find these on the Internet website.

https://www.vehiclewiringproducts.co.uk/c-50-connectors

https://www.vehiclewiringproducts.co.uk ... connectors

https://www.vehiclewiringproducts.co.uk ... connectors

My reconfiguration task was probably made much easier by having access to the ELECTRICAL sections of the two official workshop manuals (brown loose-leaf, ring-files with four D-rings), published by BLMC Triumph for the Triumph Toledo and the Triumph Dolomite Sprint. As well as having electrical-circuit wiring diagrams, these manuals also show the wiring colours and connector configurations within the multi-way connector blocks.

The things of which one needed to be sure, was which wiring-colours and electrical-connections corresponded to which systems and components, for which appropriate electrical-circuit wiring diagrams are almost essential. A feature of the Dolomite HL & Sprint wiring diagrams, is that they also show the terminal numbers for all of the electrical connections to the 8-segment warning-light cluster, which is quite useful if one wishes to customise the warning-light applications.

The Triumph Toledo & Dolomite wiring diagrams are non-coloured (i.e. black line-drawings on white-paper), so the cables are labelled with a colour code (the logic of which eludes me!) as follows: N – Brown, U – Blue, R – Red, P – Purple, G – Green, LG – Light Green, W – White, S – Slate (i.e. dark grey), B – Black, K – Pink and O – Orange. Many of the cables have a main colour and a narrow band of tracer colour. For example, the light-green & brown cable might be labelled as either LGN or LG/N on the circuit diagram. To the best of my knowledge, the wiring colour-coding follows the provisions of the then current edition of the British Standards Automotive Wiring Colours BS-AU7a.

http://www.peterrenn.co.uk/archive4.html

http://www.dimebank.com/LucasColours.html

http://www.mgb-stuff.org.uk/colourcodes.htm

https://www.autoelectricsupplies.co.uk/ ... ng_colours

I have access to only a few of the electrical circuit wiring diagrams for the various model-year variants of the Triumph Toledo 1300 & 1500, Triumph 1500 & 1500TC and Triumph Dolomite 1300, 1500, 1500HL, 1850, 1850HL & Sprint, so the following summary is largely based upon my personal experience of installing an early-model Triumph Dolomite 1850 dashboard & instruments in a 1974 Triumph Toledo 1300; both of which have two direction-indicator warning lights and both of which lack a heated rear-window warning light in the instrument panel. For early-model vehicles with a heated rear window, the associated slender, circular pull-switch with integral tell-tale light is fitted in a supplementary mounting bracket beneath the dashboard.

Late-model vehicles have just a single direction-indicator warning light and also have a heated rear-window warning light in the instrument panel. For late-model vehicles with a heated rear window, the associated square-knobbed pull-switch is fitted into the instrument panel and the separate tell-tale light is incorporated into either the dual-gauge cluster of the Triumph Toledo 1300 & 1500 and Dolomite 1300 & 1500, or the 8-segment warning-light cluster of the Triumph Dolomite 1500HL, 1850HL & Sprint. Hence, if one is mixing and matching between early and late model-years, then one needs to delve further into the logic of how the warning-light systems function and whether the wiring colours used are consistent between the various model-years concerned.

The black, thermo-set plastic, circular multi-way connector block that connects to the 12 brass pins on the back of one of my late-model, 8-segment warning-light cluster, with light-brown circuit board, has the following factory-standard wiring colours to the given terminal-pin numbers.

1. W (white) – ignition-controlled positive supply
2. BW (black / white) – hand brake
3. GR (green / red) – fuel level ?!?
4. NY (brown / yellow) – ignition [alternator]
5. WB (white / black) – heated rear window
6. UW (blue / white) – main beam
7. GW (green / white) – direction indicators
8. B (black) – earth
9. W (white) – ignition-controlled positive supply
10. WN (white / brown) – oil pressure
11. GO (green / orange) – rear demist ?!?
12. WU (white / blue) - choke

1973 Triumph Toledo & early-model Triumph Dolomite Sprint, warning & tell-tale light functions and wiring colours

NY (brown / yellow) – ignition warning light to alternator

UW (blue / white) – main-beam warning light to headlamp dip switch

GW (green / white) – right-hand indicator warning light

GR (green / red) – left-hand indicator warning light

WN (white / brown) – oil-pressure warning light to oil-pressure switch

Early-model Triumph Dolomite Sprint, warning & tell-tale light functions and wiring colours

GO (green / orange) – fuel-level warning light to fuel-level switch

WU (white / blue) – choke warning light to choke switch

BW – black / white – handbrake warning light to handbrake switch

Warning or tell-tale lights also have either an ignition-controlled positive supply cable – W (white) or earth / ground cable B (black)

WARNING – There appears to some disparity between the application of some wiring colours for early-model and late-model Triumph Toledos and/or Dolomites, so one needs to carefully check which wiring colours serve which functions on one’s own car and that of the donor car.

The table of British Vehicle Wiring Colours hosted by Auto Electric Supplies, states that green / orange cable would link the fuel-level switch in the fuel tank, to the low-fuel-level warning light on the instrument panel and that green / red cable would link the direction indicator switch to left-hand flasher lamps; which is consistent with the early-model Triumph Toledo & Dolomite wiring colours.

Physical Installation of the Sculptured Dolomite Dashboard

When I substituted the Dolomite adjustable steering column in 1982, I discovered that there was a space between the mounting brackets and the front bulkhead below the windscreen, owing to differences between the Toledo’s flat-panel dashboard and the Dolomite’s contoured dashboard with separate curved-profile instrument panel. Hence it was necessary to incorporate spacer shims. The mounting brackets of the adjustable steering column, that I had previously substituted in 1982, mated up perfectly with the fixing holes in the back of the Dolomite 1850 dashboard and also the threaded holes in the front bulkhead; no longer requiring the use of spacer shims.

Although the steel dashboard-mounting flange below the Toledo’s windscreen was not ideally suited to mounting the Dolomite 1850 dashboard (plus the associated moulded-plastic duct to fit on top of the heater unit and the associated satin-black-painted steel demister grille), I was able to drill additional holes in the dashboard mounting flange below the windscreen and adequately secure everything in place using machine screws, nuts & washers.

I might improve this mounting (possibly using clinch-nuts or riv-nuts) when I eventually substitute a late-model Triumph Dolomite 1500HL dashboard (salvaged at the local fire station), that is in better condition than the Dolomite 1850 dashboard, which has a small split in the black-vinyl covering; covered by black PVC insulating tape.

The L-shaped steel brackets on either side, at the bottom of the Dolomite 1850 dashboard, which fasten to the vertical side panels of the car, aligned perfectly with the pre-threaded holes in the Toledo. No fettling was needed!

However, what was needed that I hadn’t anticipated, was the heating & ventilation control-lever assembly with three longer control-levers, from the Dolomite 1850’s heater unit or similar heater unit; the Toledo’s original three control-levers being too short by a significant margin. Fortunately, I was soon able to acquire some of these for £1•50 from a local car breaker’s yard on Canvey Island, on Friday, 30th March 1984.

At the time, I didn’t think to incorporate any night-time illuminations for these controls, but in the future I shall be retro-fitting a clip-in, rectangular, green-prismatic-lensed lamp (of which I have a few spare), salvaged from an Austin Montego, which requires a 28 mm x 11~11¼ mm rectangular hole to be cut in the top of the heating & ventilation control-levers’ black-plastic trim panel. The green lens and its housing will be proud of the surrounding surface by only 2 mm, so it should be a very neat and unobtrusive installation, which could almost be mistaken as having been factory-fitted.

When I removed the Toledo’s original “flat-plank” style dashboard, I noticed that over the preceding 9½ years, the heating & ventilation control levers had scraped off material from the edge of one of the three slots, in the surrounding black-plastic trim panel; indicating that the position of the heating & ventilation control-lever assembly on the heater box, had not been properly adjusted before final fitment of the dashboard at the factory. I had long wondered about the origin of small particles of black-plastic material which I periodically found in the front foot wells! Fortunately, the Dolomite 1850 dashboard came complete with its own undamaged black-plastic trim surround for the three heating & ventilation control levers.


Instruments & Switches

In common with my 1974 Triumph Toledo’s original dashboard, the early-model Triumph Dolomite 1850’s dashboard, had brackets fastened to the underside, for the speedometer’s trip-counter, remote-control zeroing cable & knob, and the heated rear-window’s dashboard switch with integral tell-tale light. Neither of these are a feature of late-model Dolomite dashboards, which have a plain square-knobbed on/off switch (no integral tell-tale light) in the instrument panel for the heated rear-window and the speedometer trip-counter’s zeroing knob, protrudes through the speedometer lens.

With the exception of retaining my Toledo’s original 100 mph & 160 km/h speedometer with three integral warning lights, in place of the 120 mph & 190 km/h speedometer with no warning lights, I chose to use all of the other early-model Dolomite 1850’s instruments and clock, which were a close match to the style of the Toledo’s instrumentation, apart from the Dolomite speedometer’s and tachometer’s centre-hub & pointer. In contrast to the large-instrument disposition originally used in the Dolomite 1850 instrument panel, which located the speedometer & tachometer in the left-hand & right-hand apertures respectively, I transposed them, locating my substituted Toledo speedometer in the right-hand aperture, in a similar position to what it had been in the original Toledo dashboard, which better suited the original flexible-drive cable.

After substituting a spare centre-hub & pointer, from a defunct Toledo speedometer, into the Dolomite 1850’s tachometer, I discovered that the tachometer was non-functional, for reasons I have yet to discover. If I had discarded the non-functional tachometer, I could have retained my Toledo’s original 105 mm instrument housing, incorporating the fuel gauge, water-temperature gauge and two direction-indicator warning lights.

This would have made two of the 52 mm instrument-panel apertures available for two supplementary gauges, for functions such as oil-pressure, oil-temperature, inlet-manifold vacuum or electrical current (i.e. ammeter); four additional functions I intend to have in my new custom-made, curved-profile instrument panel, as well as having a 105 mm tachometer.

Until recently, I didn’t have the facility to utilise the 60 mm Lucas 8-segment warning-light cluster, for (a) carburettor choke engaged, (b) handbrake on, and (c) low fuel level. I also had three integral warning lights in my Toledo’s original speedometer, for headlamp main beam, low oil-pressure and ignition (i.e. alternator-voltage). Hence I only needed to use two of the eight warning-light segments in the cluster for the direction-indicator tell-tale lights; leaving six available for reallocation for various other applications.

Rather than use the complete early-model Dolomite 1850’s 8-segment warning-light cluster, I chose to use an 8-segment warning-light cluster with matching multi-pin, electrical connector block, originating from the early-model Dolomite 1850 in combination with the lens from a late-model Dolomite 1500HL, 1850HL or Sprint. This combination provided the bulb-holder circuit configuration that was better suited to my customisation purposes and the lens facilitated the symmetrical disposition of three direction-indicator tell-tale lights (two for the car and an obligatory one for a trailer). To better match the style of the early-model Toledo speedometer’s centre-hub & pointer, I later substituted the centre trim-button, from a FWD Triumph 1300’s 8-segment warning-light cluster-lens.

The warning-light & tell-tale-light functions for which I wanted to make provision, included: (i) front fog lights, (ii) rear fog lights, (iii) front auxiliary driving lights, (iv) high-intensity auxiliary reversing light, (v) left-hand direction indicators, (vi) right-hand direction indicators, and (vii) trailer direction-indicators; leaving one segment for use with a substituted square-knobbed heated rear window switch if and when I managed to source one and revise the associated wiring loom.

Wiring diagram for Toledo's retro-fitted Lucas 6WL, 8-segment warning-light cluster in 1984



As it stands, the various instruments, warning-light cluster, hazard warning light rocker-switch & two associated relays (both mounted on the back of the instrument panel | one for the direction indicators and one for the hazard warning lights), are connected to the main wiring loom by means of two 9-way connector blocks; one colourless and one black, to avoid incorrect connection.

Before I substituted the early-model Triumph Dolomite 1850 dashboard, the Toledo speedometer’s trip-counter rotary reset-knob (with flexible drive cable), heated rear-window switch with integral tell-tale light and Kenlowe engine-cooling fan over-ride switch with tell-tale lamp, had been housed in a single home-made aluminium bracket, fastened by self-tapping screws to the underside of the original Toledo dashboard. This bracket was refitted to the Dolomite 1850 dashboard.

Retaining the Toledo’s Original Heater Unit

Because I retained the Toledo’s original heater unit, I didn’t need the Dolomite 1850’s moulded-plastic, horizontal-airflow outlet cum carburettor choke control & cigarette lighter mounting, that fits under the centre of the dashboard. Hence, I needed an alternative location for the Toledo’s original carburettor choke control, which I chose to mount in the left-hand side of the curved-profile instrument panel, between the two 52 mm gauges and the 105 mm instrument. This location proved to be quite satisfactory in service, but if I needed to remove the instrument panel for maintenance, the requirement to also remove the choke control would have been an additional inconvenience.

One advantage of retaining the Toledo’s original heater unit and omitting the Dolomite 1850’s moulded-plastic, horizontal-airflow outlet, is that one has more space available for a central console below the dashboard, to mount an audio entertainment unit, supplementary instruments and/or switches.

Substituting the Triumph Dolomite 1850 dashboard, meant discarding the original Toledo radio installation, with which the dashboard was incompatible. Although I might have been able to relocate the single speaker into the top, centre of the dashboard, I didn’t have a suitable mounting for the Radiomobile 1070 radio, so this been in long-term storage.

According to entries in my February 1995 & September 1998 issues of the Rimmer Brothers’ Triumph Dolomite parts catalogue, the heater-blower unit for the Triumph Dolomite 1300 & 1500 (part No. 819270R) has a different part number from that of the Triumph Dolomite 1500HL, 1850, 1850HL & Sprint (part No. 821464R). In what ways they differ and why, I have yet to learn, but they seem to share the same heater-blower motor (part No. RTC239)! The heater-blower units should not be confused with the different heater-box assemblies for the Triumph Dolomite 1300 & 1500 (two air-flow outlets | part No.913534) the Triumph Dolomite 1500HL, 1850, 1850HL & Sprint (three air-flow outlets | part No. 913530).

With this in mind, I shall at some time in the future, compare the heater-blower unit that I salvaged at the local fire station, from the late-model Triumph Dolomite 1500HL, and compare it with that on my 1974 Triumph Toledo 1300.

[naskeet]

Experiment with Variation of Tyre Pressure – February to September 1984

Both the Triumph Toledo 1300 owners’ handbook and official BLMC Triumph Toledo 13/1500 workshop manual, specify tyre-inflation pressures of 22 psi & 26 psi for the front & rear tyres respectively, for the original factory-fitted 155 SR13 radial tyres, mounted on 4J x 13 inch steel wheels.

When my father bought the six-month old, ex-demonstrator 1974 four-door Triumph Toledo 1300 in May 1975, it had already been retro-fitted by Mann Egerton with 5½ x 13 inch Cosmic aluminium-alloy wheels and 175 SR13, Uniroyal Rallye 180, steel-braced radial tyres, but they hadn’t specified any alternative tyre pressures, for these substitute wheels & tyres, so I had always inflated the front & rear tyres to 22 psi & 26 psi respectively.

Using tyre-inflation pressures (as indicated on the hand-held PCL pencil-gauge or foot-pump gauge) of 22 psi & 26 psi in front & rear tyres respectively, I never observed uneven tread-wear patterns which might have suggested over-inflation or under-inflation.

Sometime in the early-1980s, whilst I was studying at Cranfield Institute of Technology, I learned from a fellow student who owned a Triumph Dolomite 1500, that the specified tyre-inflation pressures for the Triumph Dolomite 13/1500, were 26 psi & 30 psi for the front & rear tyres respectively; 4 psi more than for the slightly shorter and lighter-weight Triumph Toledo.

Having read that increased tyre-inflation pressures confer more precise steering and reduced rolling resistance (i.e. reduce fuel consumption), but mindful of the uneven tyre wear associated with either under-inflation or over-inflation, I decided to try slightly increasing the inflation pressures of my Toledo’s front and rear 175 SR13, Kelly-Springfield tyres.

Not being as heavy as a Dolomite 13/1500, I opted for 24 psi & 28 psi for the front & rear tyres respectively. This certainly made the steering lighter and more responsive, but I didn’t run the car long enough with these increased inflation pressures, to discover whether they gave any statistically significant reduction in fuel consumption.

One undesirable side effect of increasing the inflation pressures, was that the car became noticeably skittish, when negotiating a particular bend (I rounded it twice a week for nearly 3½ years) whose road surface was uneven (i.e. bumps or corrugations), so I reverted to the original tyre-inflation pressures of 22 psi & 26 psi for the front & rear tyres respectively.

This skittishness was probably attributable to the increased vertical stiffness of the inflated tyres, which act as air-springs in series with the suspension’s helical coil springs, thus increasing the suspension’s overall stiffness. I also suspect that substituting ultra-low profile tyres of sizes such as 185/55 R15 or 195/55 R15, might similarly confer such skittishness owing to the greater vertical stiffness of said tyres.

Ultra-low-profile tyres, of sizes 185/55 R15, 195/55 R15 & 205/50 R15 are commonly fitted to the 5½ x 15 inch & 6 x 15 inch alloy wheels, of the MG 2•0 Maestro & Maestro-Turbo, MG 2•0 Montego & Montego-Turbo and MG F & TF, which could potentially be substituted onto Triumph Toledos & Dolomites, so the matter of possible skittishness needs to be kept in mind.

I was also running the front wheels at more negative camber than the factory-standard specifications, having completely removed the stacked pairs of camber-adjustment shims from between the front sub-frame and the upper portion of the front-suspension wishbone-brackets. Despite this, there was no indication of any noticeable tyre-shoulder wear.

I have also since become aware that increasing a tyre’s inflation-pressure decreases a tyre’s slip angle when subjected to a lateral force and vice versa. As a consequence of changing tyres’ slip angles, one can also change the degree of over-steer or under-steer characteristics. This is one reason why rear-engined, rear-wheel-drive vehicles have traditionally had substantially higher inflation-pressures in the rear tyres compared to those at the front, because decreasing a rear tyre’s slip angle relative to that at the front, reduces the tendency to over-steer.

*****************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************

My hand-written maintenance records read as follows:

1974 Onward, BLMC Triumph Toledo 1300 HL, Diary of Servicing, Maintenance, Repair and Modification

Note: The Triumph Dolomite 1300 is 7•8% & 4•8% heavier than the 4-door Triumph Toledo, according to the kerb weight and gross vehicle weight respectively. Tyre pressures for the Triumph Dolomite 1300 are specified as 26 psi & 30 psi for the front & rear respectively (i.e. 18•2% & 15•4% higher than for the Triumph Toledo 1300). An increase of 2 psi should reduce tyre rolling resistance by 3% and fuel consumption by 0•4% to 0•5%. The increased lateral stiffness should improve handling but will result in a firmer ride.

4th February 1984 (mileage = 38,068) – Front & rear tyres inflated to 24 psi & 28 psi respectively, instead of 22 psi & 26 psi as given in the handbook.

15th March 1984 (mileage = 38,990) – Reset front & rear tyre pressures to 24 psi & 27 psi, owing to 28 psi in rear tyres making the tail too skittish when negotiating bends with bumps and potholes.

6th September 1984 (mileage = 41,565) – Increased front tyre pressures from 24 psi to 25 psi with a view to increasing cornering ability.

22nd September 1984 (mileage = 41,920) – Decreased front tyre pressures from 25 psi to 24 psi owing to higher pressure making the steering too light for comfort.

[naskeet]

The Celcon (Kingsway Group) Years – Late-June 1984 ~ Mid-January 1988

Having left CIT – Cranfield in mid-May 1984, and being unable to return to Haden Carrier, in Wembley, Middlesex, I immediately set about finding suitable full-time employment, either local to my family home or elsewhere in Great Britain. As luck would have it, I soon chanced upon two potentially suitable positions within easy commuting distance of my family home on Canvey Island, which were advertised in the local press.

One was for a Product Applications Research Assistant, investigating thermo-physical properties of a variety of masonry and other building materials, plus associated test methods, in the Product-Applications Research section of Kingsway Group’s Central Laboratories. The Central Laboratories were located on one of Celcon Blocks Ltd factory sites, on the Globe Industrial Estate, on the Eastern outskirts of Grays, Essex; just 15•7 miles by road from my home on Canvey Island.

https://www.hhcelcon.co.uk

https://www.hhcelcon.co.uk/our-heritage

https://www.hhcelcon.co.uk/downloads/co ... ion-sheets

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autoclave ... d_concrete

According to the flyleaf of my 1985 Celcon pocket diary, Kingsway Group comprised several companies as follows:

• Celcon Blocks Ltd (manufacturer of AAC – autoclaved aerated concrete building blocks)
• Ryarsh Brick Company Ltd (manufacturer of calcium silicate facing bricks – Sandlime, Flintlime & Village Range)
• Noelite Ltd (manufacturer of decorative concrete paving & walling – Olde English & Vista Paving and Screen & Jubilee Walling
• Kentish White Brick Company Ltd (sand quarries)
• Eurospace Furniture Packs Ltd (manufacturer of self-assembly furniture)
• Parker Laminates Ltd (manufacturer of kitchen work tops & doors)
• Nymølle Stenindustrier (sand & gravel quarries)

The other position was for a Trainee Air-Conditioning Engineer at Hiross in Rayleigh, Essex. I was suitably qualified & experienced for both, as a result of my then recent thermal insulation & heat transfer research work at Cranfield, and my former position as Intermediate Development Engineer in the Haden Carrier, Group Central Engineering Laboratory’s Building Services Section, in Wembley, Middlesex.

https://www.airoptions.co.uk/manufactur ... rt-hiross/

It transpired that the person responsible for recruitment & interviewing at Hiross, was on long-term sickness leave, so several weeks had elapsed before they contacted me; saying that they were extremely keen to interview me for the advertised position. Given that I had covered HVAC – heating, ventilation & air-conditioning as part of the Building Services course module at Cranfield during 1980~81 as well as having practical experience with the products of the Carrier Corporation at Haden Carrier, their enthusiasm to interview me did not come as a surprise!

However, despite me telephoning them several times to ask about the state of my application, there had been a lack of communication from Hiross during the intervening weeks, which faced me with a dilemma because I had since been interviewed by the departmental manager and technical director at Kingsway Group, who subsequently offered me the position, with only two weeks to accept or decline the offer! Recalling the saying that “a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush”, I again contacted Hiross to inform them that I had already been offered another position, which I would feel obliged to accept, unless they soon invited me for interview and made a counter offer.

As things turned out, I had already accepted the position in Grays, several days before someone from Hiross finally made contact, enthusiastically inviting me for interview, which I sadly had to decline. Who knows how different my life and career might have been and the history of my Triumph Toledo, had Hiross contacted me just one or two weeks earlier! Consequently, I started work in Grays on the last Monday of June 1984; barely 1½ months after leaving Cranfield.

In principle, I had the choice of driving 15•7 miles (i.e. 25•1 km) to work in the Triumph Toledo or using public transport. Public transport would have required the use of a bus from Canvey Island to Benfleet, followed by a British Rail commuter train from Benfleet to Grays on the Tilbury branch line, followed by either another bus ride or a long walk of at least 20 minutes duration, to reach my place of work. For reasons of practicality, journey duration and cost, I chose to use the car!

During late-June 1984 to mid-January 1988, when I worked at Celcon Blocks Ltd in Grays, Essex, the circa 15•7 mile journey by car, normally took about 40~45 minutes each way (corresponding to an average speed of circa 21~24 mph), during the times of day dictated by my working hours (i.e. 9:00 am to 5:00 pm). Had I been allowed to start at 9:15 am or a little later, the journey would normally have taken less than 30 minutes. I never left work at 5:00 pm, choosing to delay my departure until circa 5:30 pm, by which time the congested queue of traffic leaving the Globe Industrial Estate had cleared.

When I first started commuting to Grays in late-June 1984, there was only a short section of dual-carriageway road, but on Monday, 1st July 1985, the newest section of A13 dual carriageway was opened, reducing part of the single-carriageway bottleneck. However, this reduction in travelling time was short lived, because drivers previously using the A127 Southend Arterial road, then chose to use the new dual-carriageway section of the A13 instead.

On the evening of Wednesday, 27th November 1985, barely 5 months after the new section of dual-carriage way had opened, it took 1½ hours to travel the indicated 15•7 miles home from work, despite leaving at the customary 5:30 pm. Slightly more than 2 months later, on 6th February 1986, it took 1¼ hours to travel to work in the morning, owing to heavy traffic.

Like many companies of that era, Kingsway Group Ltd and Celcon Blocks Ltd, made “quasi-social distinctions” between the weekly-paid factory workers and monthly-paid salaried staff, of which I was one of the latter! Consequently, I was eligible to park my Triumph Toledo in the Staff Car Park, which was close to the office block and the research laboratory where I worked. By the mid-to-late 1980s, my more than 10 year old car, was beginning to look slightly scruffy, owing to accumulated long-term stone chips on the front panel and lower regions of the sills, doors and side panels.

When the opportunity presented, I had removed the visible rust, and then brush-painted with primer of various colours, which were typically grey, red, brown or aluminium, depending upon what was available at the time! On some occasions, I simply just brushed-on Finnigan’s Waxoyl (then only available by mail-order from the manufacturer) after removing the loose rust with medium-grit sand paper. The car was the only practical way to travel to work on a daily basis, so at that juncture, I didn’t have the opportunity to properly refurbish the bodywork and repaint it yellow and black as appropriate. Consequently, the car looked as though it was suffering from the pox; being covered in coloured spots of various shapes, sizes and colours!

One day whilst locking-up my car, I was approached by the works’ director Roger Thomas, who presided over the manufacturing operations at Celcon’s four factories in Grays (Essex), Westbury (Wiltshire), Rugely (Staffordshire) and Pollington (Humberside – now renamed East Yorkshire). His only comment was that my car was a disgrace and should not be allowed in the Staff Car Park; implying that it should be relegated to the factory-workers’ car park on the far side of the large factory site, which would have involved an un-necessarily long walk (especially in torrential rain) from the car park to the research laboratory.

I was incensed by this effrontery and replied that there were two simple solutions to this, which were either to provide me with a company car or pay me a level of salary whereby I could afford to buy a new car. He made no further comment and stormed off in a huff. I was quite happy with my car and didn’t want a replacement, so perhaps I should alternatively have suggested, that if the company felt my car in its then present state, did not project the right image, they might like to fund its professional renovation and re-spray, in addition to loaning me a company pool-car whilst this was being done!?! After all, a Triumph Toledo would generally have been regarded as projecting higher social status than a Citroën 2CV, which was also parked in the Staff Car Park.

Several months later in the Staff Dining Room (no admittance to hourly-paid workers!), Roger Thomas was boasting to me about the performance and other features of his new company car; a 3•5 litre V8 Rover SD1 Vanden Plas. I told him that it was just as fast as a Triumph Toledo 1300 in a traffic jam (a common feature of the North Thames Corridor area of Essex during the peak commuting hours of the day, which typically lasted from circa 4:00 pm until after 8:00 pm), and asked whether the Rover was equipped with Swedish-designed windscreen wash-wiper blades, which I said were regarded as the ultimate status symbol. He looked confused and asked what they were, so I offered to show him those that were fitted to my more than 10 year old Triumph Toledo!

I didn’t have the heart to tell him, that the Rover SD1s were equipped with a fuel pump of a type which commonly failed; a fate which had befallen the chauffeur-driven ministerial 3•5 litre V8 Rover SD1 Vanden Plas, used by Sir Keith Joseph, the then Secretary for Education, when he visited Mitchell Hall (named after R. J. Mitchell, the designer of the Supermarine Spitfire) at CIT – Cranfield during circa 1981/82. Had I felt more magnanimous, I might have suggested that Roger Thomas carry a spare fuel pump, which is regarded as a standard overseas touring spare for all vehicles, and which should form part of the emergency spares kit for any obsolete classic car.

There were times when I wished there had been an estate-car version of the Triumph Toledo, although I have since become aware that there was an estate-car design for the FWD Triumph 1300, which never went into production.

Keith Adams, “The cars : Triumph 1300/Toledo/Dolomite”, 14th July 2011

http://www.aronline.co.uk/blogs/cars/tr ... odolomite/

Triumph 1300 Estate (“Carbodies” prototype) pictures



One of those occasions was when on 19th November 1986, I ordered a 2400 mm (circa 8 feet) long, double fluorescent light unit from Newey & Eyre, the electrical wholesalers on the Globe Industrial Estate, close to the Celcon factory. The light unit was for our revamped kitchen at home, where the existing 5 feet long, double fluorescent light provided inadequate illumination at the extreme ends of the room. Carrying this long light unit in the Triumph Toledo saloon was a challenge, but after removing the rear seat, I managed to fit it through the perforations in the bulkhead, between the passenger compartment and the boot.

[naskeet]

Investigating Legality of Further Possible Lighting System Upgrades – August 1984

Prior to me taking up full-time employment in late-June 1984 with Kingsway Group Ltd / Celcon Blocks Ltd in Grays, Essex, I had already been contemplating further upgrades to both the 1974 Triumph Toledo 1300 and the 1973 VW 1600 Type 2 Westfalia Continental motor-caravan, with higher-power bulbs for the headlamps and other lighting systems.

According to some old archived literature dating from circa 1972 that I had at that time, the only power restrictions relating to headlamps with filament-bulbs, was that each individual dipped-beam or main-beam, should have bulb-filaments rated at a minimum power of NOT LESS than 30 Watts, and there was NO restriction on maximum power.

The literature I had at that time, have no indication of whether this would still applicable to more modern vehicles, so I sought clarification from appropriate organisations such as the Essex Police Road Traffic Division (in which my father’s secretary’s police-sergeant husband was an instructor), the RAC Legal Department and the Department of Transport.

The consensus from all three organisations, was that for vehicles first used before 1st April 1986, the following regulations specified a minimum power rating of 30W for dipped-beam & main-beam headlamps, but no maximum power rating, so in principle, I could substitute either P45t or P43t flanged H4 quartz-halogen bulbs as appropriate, of either 100/55W, 100/80W, 130/90W or 160/100W ratings, if obtainable. However, there was a codicil stating that the regulations prohibited the use of any headlamp on a vehicle, if it causes undue dazzle or discomfort to other persons using the road; effectively emphasising the need to ensure correct alignment of both the main & dipped beams.

H4 quartz-halogen and other headlamp bulb, P45t & P43t flange fittings

https://www.thesamba.com/vw/forum/album ... _id=338649



During its 1988/89 winter lay-up period, I upgraded the 1973 VW 1600 Type 2 with Ring brand, P45t flanged, H4 100/80W quartz-halogen bulbs (purchased from my local car accessory shop for £6•50 each) and uprated wiring, but never got around to further upgrading the 1974 Triumph Toledo 1300. Substitution of the two Ring H4 100/80W quartz-halogen bulbs in place of the two Lucas H4 60/55W quartz-halogen bulbs I had originally substituted during the summer of 1976 (purchased for £9•00 the pair, at significant trade discount from the local Lucas franchise), made a noticeable difference in lighting intensity, which facilitated more relaxed night-driving on the winding country lanes of Oxfordshire during the autumn, winter & spring of 1990/91.

The wording of the Road Vehicles Lighting Regulations 1984 and the Road Vehicles Lighting Regulations 1989 which super ceded them, make provision for a matched pair of obligatory dipped-beam headlamps (outer pair  400 mm from vehicle’s outer edge) + any number of auxiliary dipped-beam headlamps, and a matched pair of obligatory main-beam headlamps + any number of auxiliary main-beam headlamps.

Road Vehicles Lighting Regulations 1984, UK Statutory Instruments 1984, No. 812

The Road Vehicles Lighting Regulations 1989, UK Statutory Instruments 1989, No. 1796

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1989 ... tents/made

The Road Vehicles Lighting Regulations 1989, UK Statutory Instruments 1989, No. 1796, SCHEDULE 4

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1989 ... ule/4/made

The Road Vehicles Lighting Regulations 1989, UK Statutory Instruments 1989, No. 1796, SCHEDULE 5

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1989 ... ule/5/made

This implies that the Triumph 1500 & 1500TC, plus the Triumph Dolomite 1500HL, 1850, 1850HL & Sprint, with their factory-fitted four-headlamp systems, can legally have the inboard main-beam headlamps replaced by twin-filament, combined dipped & main beam headlamps, of the same or similar type to the outboard headlamps; thus providing four dipped-beams as well as four main-beams. Given that outside urban areas, only about 10% of night-driving involves the use of headlamp main-beams, it makes sense to principally improve the effectiveness of headlamp dipped-beam provision. One could further modify the system so that one could switch-off the inboard lamps, enabling one to drive on just a single pair of dipped and/or main beam headlamps.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

In a letter dated 26th September 1984, from the Department of Transport’s Vehicle Lighting Branch, J. S. Jones replied as follows:

« Thank you for your letter of 20th August with some queries about front lamps for vehicles. »

« Detailed requirements concerning the lighting of vehicles are contained in the Road Vehicles Lighting Regulations 1984, (SI No. 812). These provide that for vehicles first used before 1 April 1986 there are no maximum wattage limitations on main or dipped beam headlamps on vehicles. But there is a requirement that such lamps have a minimum wattage restriction of not less than 30 watts. And this applies whether the lamps concerned are obligatory or optional extra headlamps. There is no requirement either in respect of wattage restrictions on front fog lamps. »

« However, obligatory dipped and main beam headlamps fitted to new vehicles first used after 1 April 1986, will cease to have any minimum wattage restriction but instead will be required to have a designated approval mark to show that these lamps comply with specified European standards of performance for headlamps and are ‘E’ or ‘e’ marked accordingly. This will mean that they comply with the relevant Regulation of the UN/ECE or the equivalent Directive of the European Community. In order to gain such approval, headlamps of this type will have to demonstrate that they comply with the required beam pattern and distribution of light specified for headlamps. After that date also, front fog lamps when fitted will have to carry the required approval marking. »

« Every main beam headlamp is required by law to be so constructed that the light emitted therefrom can be deflected at the will of the driver to become a dipped beam, or can be extinguished by the operation of a device which at the same time (i) causes the lamp to emit a dipped beam, or (ii) causes another lamp to emit a dipped beam. »

« These Regulations also prohibit the use of any motor vehicle first used after 1 April 1986 which is equipped with any lamp of a type that is required by any of the Schedules to those Regulations to be marked with an approval mark unless every such lamp is fitted with a filament lamp referred to in the Designation of Approval Marked Regulations. This means in effect that lamps with filament bulbs which themselves require an approval mark can only be replaced by filament bulbs with similar approval marking. »

« But Regulations already made under Consumer Safety legislation require that filament bulbs for vehicle lamps or devices which come within the scope of UN/ECE Regulations 37 cannot be supplied or offered for sale unless such filament lamps bear the necessary approval mark provided, of course, that they are sold as an entirely separate entity and not as part of a lamp unit or vehicle. For ease of reference I enclose a copy of the relevant Regulation and you will see from the last page the range of filament lamps covered by these Regulations and the type of lamp in which a particular filament bulb is normally used. »

CONSUMER PROTECTION: The Filament Lamps for Vehicles (Safety) Regulations 1982, Statutory Instrument No. 444

« It would seem therefore that a H3 and H4 filament bulb for a headlamp and auxiliary lamp and headlamp respectively, must when sold carry the required approval mark. But it would be difficult to say that unapproved filament bulbs of the type you describe could not be used in lamps on vehicles first used before 1 April 1986. »

« Finally, there are no maximum power restrictions for front facing lamps but the 1984 Regulations prohibit the use of any headlamp on a vehicle if it causes undue dazzle or discomfort to other persons using the road. »

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

The Road Vehicles Lighting Regulations 1989, still forms the basis of vehicle lighting regulations in the United Kingdom, subject to the provisions of various periodic amendments in 1994, 1996, 2001, 2005 & 2017.

The Statutory Instruments which make up the GB Road Vehicle Lighting Regulations are available on the Legislation website of The Office of Public Sector Information (OPSI) as follows:

Base regulation:

• The road vehicles lighting regulations 1989: Statutory Instrument (S.I.) 1989 No. 1796

As amended by:

• The Road Vehicles Lighting (Amendment) Regulations 1994: S.I. 1994 No. 2280

• The road vehicles lighting (amendment) regulations 1996: S.I. 1996 No. 3016

• The road vehicles lighting (amendment) regulations 2001: S.I. 2001 No. 560

• The road vehicles lighting (amendment) regulations 2005: S.I. 2005 No. 2559

• The road vehicles lighting (amendment) regulations 2005: S.I. 2005 No. 3169

The Road Vehicles Lighting (Amendment) Regulations 2005, UK Statutory Instruments 2005, No. 2559

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/200 ... tents/made

The Road Vehicles Lighting (Amendment) Regulations 2017, UK Statutory Instruments 2017, No. 852

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2017/852/made

Guidance: Aftermarket HID Headlamps, Published 1st May 2010

https://www.gov.uk/government/publicati ... -headlamps

[naskeet]

Replacement of Flexible Fuel Hose & Retro-Fitment of an After-Market In-Line Fuel-Filter – October & December 1984

On Saturday, 13th October 1984, at a mileage of 42,398, I replaced all of the flexible fuel hoses and associated hose clips, between the fuel-tank outlet and the fuel-pump inlet, owing to initial signs of the fuel hose perishing.

On Monday, 15th October 1984, I purchased from the local branch of Tesco Stores supermarket, in Pitsea, Essex, an after-market TJ Filters in-line fuel-filter kit for £1•75.

The fuel filter, together with the rubber adapter-hoses included in the kit, was retro-fitted to the Triumph Toledo on Sunday, 2nd December 1984, at a mileage of 43,566. By early-July 1985, just eight months later, the rubber adapter-hoses were exhibiting serious signs of perishing; prompting me to replace them with conventional fuel hose.

The following week when I revisited the Tesco Stores supermarket on Tuesday, 16th July 1985, to purchase the weekly groceries’ shopping, I called in at the customer-services to voice my complaints about the faulty rubber adapter-hoses and to warn them of the hazard they posed re petrol fires in motor vehicles to which they were fitted. To their credit, the representative at Tesco Stores, noted my concerns about the safety of the product and refunded the £1•75 purchase price in full, so I effectively got the fuel filter itself for nothing.

[naskeet]

EDTA Treated the Lead-Acid Starter Battery – Late-1984

Sometime during the early 1980s, I learned from an article in the Motorcaravanners' Club magazine, of a cheap, analytical chemical reagent, called EDTA (otherwise known as, ethylene diamine tetra-acetic acid or its di-sodium salt - C10H14O8N2Na2•H2O), which could be used to prolong the effective service life, of lead-acid car batteries, by inhibiting sulphation; a process to which motor-caravan batteries are particularly prone, when left unused for extended periods or substantially discharged, but not immediately recharged.

In late 1984, I obtained some through the Celcon laboratory at which I had started work in June 1984, and treated each of the battery-cells, of all our existing and subsequent car batteries (including those of the 1974 Triumph Toledo and 1973 VW Type 2 campervan!), with a heaped teaspoonful (or two level teaspoonfuls), of EDTA powder, as recommended by the author. Since then, the service life of our car batteries, have typically been 7 to 8 years, but the first battery of my father's Ford Sierra XR4x4, lasted nearly 13 years!

[naskeet]

Substituted Sparkrite HT Ignition Leads – January 1985

Thursday, 20th December 1984 – Purchased new ignition distributor-cap & rotor-arm for £2•60.

Saturday, 5th January 1985 – Substituted a set of five Sparkrite HT ignition leads, bought individually for £0•25 each, in a product-line clearance sale at the local branch of Halfords. Note that Sparkrite's 1984 recommended retail prices for individual Hypalon HT leads of 30, 40 or 50 cm lengths, are £1•58 each

I had been aware of Sparkrite HT ignition leads, from a general product sales leaflet that I had previously received from Sparkrite, pertaining to their security alarm systems (reviewed in the Consumer Association’s Which? magazine) and electronic ignition systems. They were said to provide better radio interference suppression than either graphite HT ignition leads or copper HT ignition leads with resistive spark-plug connectors.

Sparkrite electronic accessories

https://www.thesamba.com/vw/archives/lit/sparkrite.php

Sports Ignition Coils & HT ignition leads



According to my maintenance records, the electrical resistance per unit length of the Sparkrite HT Ignition cable material, was quoted in the sales literature as being 5•2 k/m (i.e. kilo-ohms per metre). For some reason, I did not make a note of the resistance of the Sparkrite HT ignition lead between the ignition coil and the distributor cap, but those of nominally equal length between the distributor cap and the spark plugs, were recorded as being 1•80 k, 1•72 k, 1•73 k & 1•77 k for engine-cylinder numbers 1, 2, 3 & 4 respectively.

There was also an advertisement for Sparkrite HT ignition leads, on Page 58 of the Car Mechanics magazine’s 64-page special supplement, “PASS THE MoT FIRST TIME!”, published sometime in 1984.

https://www.thesamba.com/vw/archives/li ... ooklet.php



**************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************

Intriguingly, I found on Pages 182 & 183 of a 1985-edition, Biltema mail-order catalogue – Katalog 73 (Biltema in Sweden are akin to Halfords in Great Britain), an illustration of HT ignition leads, of identical or similar internal construction to that of the red Sparkrite HT leads I fitted in January 1985.





The main headings read as follows:

« Avstörda tändkabelsatser »

« Biltemas tändkablar är mjuka och böjliga även den kallaste vinterdag »

« Från 59:- »

« Snabbare start »
« Lägre bensinförbrukning »
« Bättre prestanda »

The annotation text with arrow => pointing to “black” outer shroud reads as follows:

« Isolering av EPDM-gummi som tål spänningar upp till50.000 volt. Materialet är olje- och bensinbeständigt och tål temperaturvaxlingar mellan -40ºC upp till +130ºC »

The annotation text with arrow => pointing to the “yellow” inner core reads as follows:

« Textiltråd »

The annotation text with arrow => pointing to the yellow core’s “black” sleeve reads as follows:

« Kärna av ferromagnetiska partiklar som absorberar »störningssignalerna» och ger en effektiv avstörning. Resistansen är 1400 ohm per meter »

The annotation text with arrow => pointing to helically-wound “red” wire reads as follows:

« Ledare av en krom-nickellegering (rostfritt)

The general description reads as follows:

« Avstörda tändkabelsatser »

« Kvalitetständkabelsats som behåller sin elasticitet även i sträng kyla i motsats till PVC-överdragna tändkablar. »

« Att köra med utslitna tändkablar är dålig ekonomi. På samma sätt som tändstift och brytarspetsar slits, blirockså tändkablar utslitna. Dåliga tändkablar medför startsvårigheter, ökad bensinförbrukning och även dåliga prestanda hos bilmotorn. Byte rekommendaras var 4000:e mil.

« Biltemas tändkabel med dess speciella uppbyggnad har en mycket effektiv inbyggd avstörning. Levereras komplett med kabelskor och kabelmuffar. »

« Lite historik »

• « Tändkablar med kärna av grafit är för länge sedan ute ur bilden. Nackdel: Grafitkärnan gick lätt av när man böjde kabeln »
• PVC-kablar med ingjutna grafitpartiklar som ledare har under senare år blivit vanliga. Fukttåliga och ingen risk för avbrott ens om man skulle slå knut på en tändkabel. Nackdel: Stela och svårhanterliga i sträng kyla. »
• Biltemas avstörda tändkablar med isolering av EPDM-gummi är en av de senaste årens produktnyheter. Har PVC-kabelns fördelar – men inte dess nackdelar. Biltemas tändkablar är mjuka och böjliga även den kallaste vinterdag. »


Using an on-line Swedish to English translator, I obtained the following:

The main headings read as follows:

« Subverted ignition cable sets » Nigel’s note: I suspect that the word “Substitute” might be a more appropriate translation than “Subverted”.

« Car theme ignition cables are soft and flexible even on the coldest winter day » Nigel’s note: I suspect that “Car theme” is a literal translation of Biltema, which is the Swedish company’s name.

« From 59:- » Nigel’s note: I presume this to be a reference to prices in Swedish Kronor

« Faster start »
« Lower gasoline consumption »
« Better performance »

The annotation text with arrow => pointing to “black” outer shroud reads as follows:

« Insulation of EPDM rubber that can withstand voltages up to 50,000 volts. The material is oil and gasoline resistant and can withstand temperature fluctuations between -40ºC up to 130ºC »

The annotation text with arrow => pointing to the “yellow” inner core reads as follows:

« Textile thread »

The annotation text with arrow => pointing to the yellow core’s “black” sleeve reads as follows:

« Core of ferromagnetic particles that absorb the "interference signals" and provide an effective disruption. Resistance is 1400 ohms per meter »

The annotation text with arrow => pointing to helically-wound “red” wire reads as follows:

« Conductor of a chromium-nickel alloy (stainless) »

The general description reads as follows:

« Subverted ignition cable sets » Nigel’s note: I suspect that the word “Substitute” might be a more appropriate translation than “Subverted”.

« Quality ignition cable kit that retains its elasticity even in severe cold as opposed to PVC-coated ignition cables. »

« Driving with worn-out ignition cables is poor economy. In the same way that spark plugs and breaker tips wear out, ignition cables also become worn out. Poor ignition cables cause starting difficulties, increased gasoline consumption and even poor performance of the car engine. Change is recommended every 4,000 miles. » Nigel’s note: 4,000 Swedish miles = 40,000 km

« Biltema's ignition cable with its special structure has a very effective built-in interference. Comes complete with cable shoes and cable sleeves. » Nigel’s note: I cannot visualise what “cable shoes” refers to!?!

« A little history »

• « Ignition cables with a graphite core are long ago out of the picture. Disadvantage: The graphite core went off easily when bending the cable »

• « PVC cables with infused graphite particles as conductors have become commonplace in recent years. Moisture resistant and no risk of interruption even if you were to tie the knot on an ignition cable. Disadvantage: Stiff and difficult to handle in severe cold. »

• « Biltema's broken ignition cables with insulation made of EPDM rubber are one of the product news of recent years. Has the advantages of pvc cable – but not its drawbacks. Car theme ignition cables are soft and flexible even on the coldest winter day. » Nigel’s note: I suspect that “Car theme” is a literal translation of Biltema, which is the Swedish company’s name.

Scanned illustration to follow sometime in the future!

[naskeet]

Further Upgrading Windscreen Wipers & Washers Part 2 – Adjustable Wiper Arms & SVD Wash-Wiper Blades – July & September 1985

In 1984 & 1985, I came across 'special offers', in the British motoring-magazine Motor and Daily Mail newspaper, promoting an unusual windscreen wiper blade, made by SVD – Safety Vehicles Development AB, in Sweden. This featured a perforated, hollow blade rubber, through which water was delivered to the windscreen, at intervals along the blade's leading edge. Water was supplied to the hollow blade rubber via a small-bore, flexible rubber hose.

Advertisement in the Motor magazine, in circa 1984, for Swedish-made SVD wash-wiper blade kits



According to the advertisement in the 1984 Motor magazine, wiper blade kits were available with blades of different lengths, priced as follows:

10, 11 & 12 inch length blades priced at £11•50

13, 14 & 15 inch length blades priced at £12•65

16, 18 & 20 inch length blades priced at £13•80

Impressionistic illustration, from a 1985 issue of the Daily Mail newspaper, showing water-droplets from the blade-rubbers of a pair of Swedish-made SVD wash-wiper blades



The above illustration, unrealistically shows water jets or droplets coming simultaneously from both edges of the windscreen-wiper blade rubber, which would only occur if the blade were lifted away from the windscreen. In service, the blade flips to & fro as it sweeps in opposite directions, alternately blocking and unblocking the perforations in either edge, as shown in the Motor magazine illustration.

According to the advertisement in the 1985 Daily Mail newspaper, wiper blade kits were available with blades of different lengths, priced as follows:

11 inch length blades priced at £11•50

13, 14 & 15 inch length blades priced at £12•65

16, 18 & 20 inch length blades priced at £13•80

16th March 1985 – Sent letter to Nimrod Marketing (contact details given in Daily Mail newspaper) enquiring about SVD windscreen wash-wiper blade kits for the 1974 Triumph Toledo and 1973 VW Type 2.

22nd March 1985 – Letter from Nimrod Marketing, mentioning that if there is no grille directly below the windscreen, through which to pass the water-supply tubing to the wash-wipers, then it would be preferable to “drill two small holes as close as possible to the swivels of each wiper-arm, for which grommets are supplied”.

2nd May 1985 – Sent letter to my Swedish university-friend Kjell B. Gestlöv about Swedish-made SVD wash-wiper blades and our impending motor-caravan touring holiday to Hungary in June, in the 1973 1600 VW Type 2 Westfalia Continental.

Sadly, these SVD kits (comprising two wiper blades, small-bore rubber hose, T-piece and other sundry items) were prohibitively expensive, priced at £12•65 each for the blade-size I wanted and the UK suppliers didn't sell replacement blade rubbers, which I regarded as essential. Fortunately, my Swedish university-friend Kjell B. Gestlöv, in Södertälje, Sweden, whom I had known at CIT – Cranfield during 1980~81, was able to buy an SVD wash-wiper blade kit (comprised a pair of nominally 15 inch long wiper blades, flexible rubber hose and two sets of replacement blade rubbers for the 1973 VW 1600 Type 2 Westfalia Continental motor-caravan, at his local car accessory shop; costing less than £12•65.

Swedish made, universal SVD wash-wiper blade kit, with spare wiper blade rubbers, plus a few other commonly available clips and alternative sized grommets



In June 1985, Kjell brought these with him to England, together with another set for the Triumph Toledo (originally purchased for his VW Golf which he didn’t use for some reason!), before we departed in the VW motor-caravan, for our European touring holiday to Hungary via France, Germany & Austria. That 1985 summer touring holiday proved to be rather rainy, so it’s a pity I didn’t have time to install the SVD wash-wipers on the VW motor-caravan, before we departed; recalling that the VW Type 2’s factory-standard windscreen washers were even less effective than the Triumph Toledo’s factory-standard windscreen washers!

During Autumn 1982, I had previously upgraded the Triumph Toledo’s windscreen-washer system, by repositioning the existing pair of windscreen washer jets and retro-fitting an additional second-hand pair of identical windscreen washer jets. This was certainly a significant improvement over the factory-standard installation, but windscreen wiping & cleansing were not perfect and the four jets used a lot of water!

viewtopic.php?f=4&t=29933&p=316553#p316553

Both of the sets of SVD wash-wiper blades that Kjell brought me, were 395 mm (15½ inches) in length, compared to the Toledo’s standard blade length of 355 mm (14 inches), which were too long to use in conjunction with the Toledo’s original factory-fitted windscreen-wiper arms. Fortunately, I was able to substitute some suitable length-adjustable, satin-black Pacet PA3 windscreen-wiper arms, with which one could use a variety of wiper-blade lengths. Given the glare discomfort I had suffered from sunlight reflected off the original polished stainless-steel wiper arms, the relatively non-reflective satin-black finish was a boon.

26th July 1985 (48,324 miles) - Original factory-fitted, stainless-steel Tex windscreen-wiper arms, replaced with satin-black, Pacet PA3, length-adjustable units.

1st September 1985 (49,117 miles) - Fitted SVD windscreen wash-wiper blade system. Blade rubbers are of 395 mm (i.e. 15½ inches) length compared to standard blade length of 355 mm (14 inches)

In the cases of both the Triumph Toledo and the VW Type 2, I didn’t follow the suggested installation instructions for routing the water-supply tubing to the wash-wiper blades, which I considered untidy and lacked a factory-fitted appearance. Instead, I chose to drill small holes in the bodywork, close to the wiper-arm spindles, just below the windscreen, and pass the flexible rubber tubing through rubber cable-grommets in the drilled holes. The flexible rubber tubing was attached to the windscreen-wiper arms using self-adhesive cable clips.

SVD/SWW Wash-Wiper Blades – Sweden

https://www.thesamba.com/vw/archives/ma ... sweden.php

Installation instructions for SWW wash-wiper system







Images 2 & 3 appear to be the same or similar



Fitting replacement SVD blade rubbers



Fitting replacement SWW blade rubbers



There were perforations in both edges, at intervals along the entire length of the hollow wash-wiper blade rubbers. For any given sweep direction, the perforations were closed on the trailing edge and open on the leading edge, allowing water to flow onto the windscreen glass, solely ahead of the wiper-blades’ leading edges, as shown in the 1984 Motor magazine illustrations.

To the best of my recall, the water-delivery perforations in wash-wiper rubbers, were originally at circa 75 mm spacing, that was satisfactory under most conditions, but I supplemented these by drilling extra holes in the rubber, at circa 25 mm spacing, which further improved water distribution and effectively eliminated the last vestige of smearing on a badly soiled windscreen, which occurred when the windscreen was deluged by dirt-laden spray after the rain had ceased, coming off the tyres of passing buses, coaches and lorries.

On both the Triumph Toledo and the VW Type 2, the SVD wash-wiper blades, lived up to the claims made in the 1984 Motor magazine, providing much more effective windscreen cleaning, whilst using much less water than had been needed with the original factory-fitted, two-jet windscreen washer systems. I would not wish to revert to conventional multi-jet windscreen washer systems (as is still the norm on even the most modern cars!) and it is debatable whether even wiper-arm mounted washer jets would be as effective as wash-wiper blades!

Bay Window Bus > 1968~79 VW Type 2 window wiper & washer upgrades

http://www.thesamba.com/vw/forum/viewtopic.php?t=186468

By the mid-1990s, I had only one spare set of replacement wash-wiper rubbers remaining, but sadly my friend Kjell, could no longer obtain the washer-wiper blade kits or replacement blade-rubbers, at any of the local retailers in Sweden, owing to alleged problems with washer fluid freezing in the tubing and/or blade-rubbers, during very cold weather!

Hence, I contacted the Swedish Trade Council, via the Swedish Embassy in London, to ask whether they could provide me with contact details of the manufacturer SVD – Safety Vehicle Developments AB (later changed to SWW – SW Washwiper AB) in Sweden, of which they notified me as follows:

SW. Washwiper AB, Idalavägen 1, 182 78 STOCKSUND, Sweden.

Tel: 08-85 85 22

Fax: 08-85 41 84

Hence, I was able to purchase replacement wash/wiper blades and/or rubber refills by mail-order, direct from them. The spare perforated, hollow blade rubbers were priced at 60 SwKr per pair, and complete kits (comprising two wiper blades, flexible rubber hose, grommets, wiper-arm attachment adapters, etc) were priced at 140 SwKr to 190 SwKr, dependent upon wiper length.

I later discovered the following Internet website links, but I have been unable to gain access for the past few years, for reasons I have yet to determine:

http://hem.passagen.se/zelus

http://hem.passagen.se/zelus/index.htm

http://hem.passagen.se/zelus/next.htm

http://hem.passagen.se/zelus/order.htm