The Triumph 2000/2500/2.5 Register Forum

Spacers:

Just a small point, which might aid clarity when describing this situation - "asymetrical" means non-symetrical, ie the mounting is visibly lop-sided.
"Symetrical" means it can be fitted either way round.

Just a thought, but is it possible that the o/d unit has originated from something other than a saloon? I seem to remember that some TR units at least have a different rear casing with the cast-in bracket at a different angle to accommodate the less offset mounting of the engine/transmission combination in the TR chassis. Not sure, however, whether that is just A-Type or also J-Type as well.

Ostensibly, having the gearbox mounted 'vertical' in a saloon shell rather than canted-over slightly to the o/s could cause the fouling issue you appear to have. Against that, the engine is still going to be inclined to the o/s, and presumably trying to twist the gearbox and o/d with it, so not sure of what the overall impact might be...

johnnydog wrote: ↑

Sun Jan 26, 2020 1:48 pm

But the genuine / originals (that I have, and I have a few nos!) are definitely not handed Charles!

See the bottom image from Joyofsix! I just must have always had J Types!

I have had this problem once in a Volvo 240, when after a lengthy correspondence in which everybody insisted my setup was right so the gearbox "must be centralised", I gave up arguing and just drilled a new hole in the plate the mount bolted to, 1/2" to the left of the original. Problem solved!

Regardless of the explanation here, there are a variety of gearbox mounting options available, so I'd just pick 'n mix to move the height and/or tilt so that it comes right.
There are three lengths of spacer available - A-type (none), J-type (long), automatic (shorter). By fitting longer on one side and shorter on the other that would tilt the gearbox?
Is the adaptor plate handed or not? The Chris Witor photo clearly shows the two holes as being at different heights, so for a big change of gearbox angle you could reverse it. Or fit one of the non-handed kind that other responders seem to have?
Or experiment with different thicknesses of washer and then cut a pair of spacer tubes to suit?

Good discussion this! When I bought my car, even although it is/was totally original,itdidn't stop "modern" garages fitting washers and no bushing between gearbox mount and floor.I bought a new mounting and bushes and all improved.
Just a point.,with the age of our cars,should the terminology not be Asy-imperial and Sy-imperial????????????? :lol:Just a small point, which might aid clarity when describing this situation - "asymetrical" means non-symetrical, ie the mounting is visibly lop-sided.
"Symetrical" means it can be fitted either way round.

Richard B wrote: ↑

Sun Jan 26, 2020 8:37 am

.

I think that the engine cross-member should have the holes off-set, but doesn't as its an early one.

Think you kinda answered the problem, the later engine mount had different offset holes. Must have done it for a reason.

https://www.chriswitor.com/datasheets/ ... ptions.pdf

Clifford Pope wrote: ↑

Mon Jan 27, 2020 8:21 am

Just a small point, which might aid clarity when describing this situation - "asymetrical" means non-symetrical, ie the mounting is visibly lop-sided.
"Symetrical" means it can be fitted either way round.

Well, I did inadvertently throw a spanner in the works then describing the nos gearbox mountings as 'asymmetrical' when I should have quoting 'symetrical'! Apologies all!
Anyway just for clarity again - my new original gearbox mounts are the same dimensions on both sides and therefore can be fitted either way.
Sorry for the lack of correct grammar.....!

Anyway, has the problem been solved?

Thought I should give an update.

The spacers were incorrect.1.3" Auto, rather than the 1-9/16" J Type.

I made a rookie error. I measured them in situ, but did not take into account the height of the insulating top-hat bush. Although the gearstick is still over (but maybe correct), at least the rubber gaiter fits properly.

Thanks everyone for the advice.

ps speaking to Chris Witor, the mounts are symmetrical, although various picture suggest otherwise.

pps. When I bought my MkII PI saloon, the cross-member had been fitted the wrong way round by the DPO! This was glaringly obvious when I went underneath the car.