Featured Resurrecting 1966 Tiger T100ss

Yeah…. But I’m coming to almost like them. They sort of ‘go’ with the Sherbourne Green.

 

20/2/25

So… for about the third time I’m reworking the forks. Even as I screwed them together the last time I was realising that various points weren’t good enough. All the parts are of course old and showing their age. The chrome on the seal holders that I had thought looked okay really wasn’t good enough and I’d had trouble assembling them to the sliders when the O ring and upper washer was in place and I suspected that it had become displaced when screwed together. The lips for the gaiter location also were mismatched, one was significantly larger than the other. They certainly weren’t original or even a pair, but I was using them to cut costs and the fact that along with the top nuts they were the only parts of the forks from the original ‘pile’.

My paintwork on the sliders and upper shrouds looked dull and uninteresting. I’d also managed to chip them in a couple of places. Mainly though, I’m not at all sure that the legs would remain oil tight in use as I hadn’t used any sealants on the assembly, just trusting to the good fit of the bits. But, the general wear and tear on the threads leads me to think that oil is going to get past them when they’re put under a bit of pressure. Anyway the legs went in a corner for the time being while I thought about it a bit.

I’ve now pulled them apart again and bought in two new seal holders. Assembling them to the sliders the unworn threads of the holders seem to have made a tighter union with the leg which is an improvement. Luckily the O ring doesn’t seem to have been displaced so that seems to have been okay. I’ve repainted the front fork upper shrouds and the sliders for the second time and they look rather better this time around.

The main thing is preventing oil leaks when in use. My reading is that the most suspect areas are the leg/seal holder threads and the hole occupied by the bolt that holds the damper cone in the bottom of the slider. There’s a choice of various sealants, some recommended and some not. As I’m not after a thread-locker I’ve chosen to use a non-setting sealant so I’ve put a very thin smear of Hylomar-blue under the head of the top bush where it butts against the top of the slider as this is the single point the oil can exit the leg at the top, and another light smear on the shank of the damper-cone retaining bolt as the only point at the bottom. I’ve also used new aluminium sealing washers, which is what I should have done in the first place.

While I’ve been messing about with the damper-cones I’ve also noticed that the two I’m using are actually different sizes. One is taller and thicker than the other so for a given height the thicker one was going to blank off a greater cross sectional area of the shuttle-valve than the other. There isn’t a great deal of difference so I’ve no idea how much difference that would make to the damping effect side to side, but as I have accrued a selection of cones I’ve pulled out the other two to compare. In fact all four are marginally different so I’ve selected two which are closest in size and used them. Just hope I’ve made the right choice.

 

Yeah it’s been a while. It’s b****y cold in my garage is my only excuse

 

Front forks finally assembled and in place. Gaiters are held in place with non-standard Jubilee clips at the moment as the correct ones are rather flimsy and I don’t want them getting damaged as I’ve got a lot of work to do in that area. Next job is to offer up the 8 inch TLS brake hub to see if I can get it to fit in place of the standard Single Leading Shoe brake, then if okay get some wheels laced on.

 

26/2/25
I’ve started to pull the TLS brake hub apart to check out and see what’s going to be needed to utilise it on the T100. It is a ‘complete’ hub that came with the original pile of bits so I wasn’t expecting too much. But, I’ve been pleasantly surprised. Removing the brake assembly from the hub it appears that someone might have been in before me. There was next to no brake dust and although bedded in the linings are in surprisingly good condition. I’ve knocked out the bearings and spindle and there is what looks like fresh grease (from 25 years ago) mixed in with the old. The bearings feel smooth and the other bits operate, more or less, as they should.

The only thing that’s disappointing and that I’ve never noticed before, is that the backplate and hub seems to have been painted silver, so it’s not polished aluminium as I had thought. I don’t know if Triumph ever painted these parts from standard but it does seem to be a fairly professional job.

I’ve also pulled the spindle from what I take to be the original SLS hub and offered it up to the forks… and it fits all 6.5ins of it. Next is to get it into the hub and make sure there’s a correct engagement with the fork slider abutment.

 

Hi Baza.
Yeah. It’s a bit of a mess. This is an 8 inch brake probably from either a ‘69/70 650 or possibly even a late 500 Daytona. Either way I believe that pushrod should be straight and it’s going to get replaced, probably along with the two operating levers if they don’t clean up well enough. Without the bend the two operating arms should be parallel I think. There’s also a couple of thrust pads missing from under the leading edge of the shoes which may be effecting that also. Hopefully that’ll bring the shoes and the arms to their correct positions. The cable is also going as it’s rusty and I’d like to incorporate a stoplight switch as well.

 

Thanks darkman That’s a good idea. I’ll give that a try when I’ve got it stripped out.

 

Sounds good. What will you do for the brake outer cable abutment that will have to be moved? (up to the 11:00 o-clock position).

 

Just love it when a plan comes together.

 

I’m afraid it’s difficult to really say what size the brake is without measuring the internal drum diameter. The thing is that both 7inch and 8inch drums were fitted throughout 1968 to 70., so the year doesn’t determine the diameter of the brake, only what it’s operating mode looks like.

Initially, for the ‘68 model year only, the 8inch brakes were fitted to the larger 650 engined bikes and the 7inch to the 500s. Both the 7 and 8 inch brakes had the long looped cable coming in as yours does, from the mudguard at the back of the wheel.

For various reasons the cable run was changed for model year ‘69 on, where the cable is routed down the fork leg and comes down to the hub from above. So both the 7 and 8 inch brakes continued in their respective models through 69 and 70 but with the cable approaching from a different direction than it did in 68. The only addition to that is that the “hot” 500 Daytona models with the 19 inch wheel got the 8 inch brake.

The “various reasons” for the change of cable layout as far as I’m aware is that the long loop of the cable was unsightly and a retaining clip on the back of the mudguard tended to break/come adrift leaving the cable loose to flap about in the wind. Also the length of the cable, (which was a 2 part with a brake light switch in the middle) tended to feel a bit spongy and had a longer lever travel to operate the brake. Shortening the cable tidied it up and gave it a firmer feel.

If yours came with the original wheel attached and it’s a 18in wheel then the chances are that it’s a 7in brake. If it’s in a 19in wheel then it’s probably an 8in brake. No doubt there are more experienced eyes than mine that can tell at a glance but I’m afraid I can’t be more positive.

Hth. Dave.