Hard Jobs

I like to take a break from rebuilding Nortons to do a Triumph here and there. I find them MUCH easier to work on, no silly tight together carbs, air cleaner, head removable, head re-torqueing and so on. I'm finishing up on a 73 Triumph Trident today and working on the one darn near impossible task - adjusting the clutch! It's almost as hard and installing the Norton front iso and like the front iso, I never really know what I did to finally get it done!

Many years ago I fixed copiers for a living and then later mainframe computers. We technicians would daydream about putting the deign engineers and technicians in a room and see who survived 9there wee way more of us).

The Trident clutch works great, the release mechanism is terrible!

I hear you Greg. Back in the 2000, I traded a BEAUTIFUL and well sorted 1974 Norton 850 ... for a BEAUTIFUL; but NOT well sorted 1975 Triumph T160. (Big mistake, IMO.) Anyway, I never did get the clutch right, and one reason I sold it in 2001 at Mid Ohio vintage Days. (Randy Baxter of Baxter cycle, Marne, Iowa got it ... for $2300, ugh) I had even bought all new clutch parts from Les Williams in the UK, nylon lined clutch cable, careful setup, adjusting, etc. I just gave up with it. That and it got 28 MPG. Sure was a nice lookin' T160 though --- with good chrome and stock Red paint with white scallops.

Hi Greg,

Take a look on Youtube at an Aussie bloke going by the name Triumph Enthusiast. Follow his guide & you should have a reasonable clutch. I've done a few & they are not the best design in the world as the lift mechanism is a bit shit in my opinion.

Martyn.

Matchless said:

Hi Greg,

Take a look on Youtube at an Aussie bloke going by the name Triumph Enthusiast. Follow his guide & you should have a reasonable clutch. I've done a few & they are not the best design in the world as the lift mechanism is a bit shit in my opinion.

Martyn.

Click to expand...

Ya, I've watched it. I have three Tridents, all stock. It's a matter of thousandths of a inch whether they work or not. The mechanism would be OK if there was more movement. I finally replaced the chrome OEM clutch lever with an after-market alloy lever. That gives a little more travel and the clutch works fine now.

marshg246 said:

Ya, I've watched it. I have three Tridents, all stock. It's a matter of thousandths of a inch whether they work or not. The mechanism would be OK if there was more movement. I finally replaced the chrome OEM clutch lever with an after-market alloy lever. That gives a little more travel and the clutch works fine now.

Click to expand...

What T160s should've had was the 1 1/6" pivot radius clutch lever, however, it appears the vast majority had 7/8" radius levers.
With the 1 1/16" lever there is more than adequate lift.

Edit: It has been stated elsewhere that the Trident clutch lever pivot radius was 1.0", however, the dimension reported by owners is generally 7/8".

I fitted a hydraulic set up to a friends T160 a few years ago & that gave a slight improvement. It came from LP Williams & used a 10mm bore M/C, which if I remember correctly gave 0.027" actual lift. Can't remember the slave cylinder dia. I calculated it at the time & I think it should have given 0.032"lift. With an 11mm bore M/C it would be better & still easy to operate. The good thing with the hydraulic set up is there is no need for free play as with a cable, also as things heat up the lift remains constant.

L.A.B. said:

What T160s should've had was the 1 1/6" pivot radius clutch lever, however, it appears the vast majority had 7/8" radius levers.

T160 clutch lever assy. 1-1/6th pivot centre

www.triumph-spares.co.uk

With the 1 1/16" lever there is more than adequate lift.

Click to expand...

Ya, all three of my T150Vs have 7/8". The after market lever has a little more. I would like to keep the Lucas console.

I've fitted a Magura dog leg clutch lever with 1 1/16" centres onto my T160. I have free play in the cable and have reserve pull available on the lever so that I can have quite a bit of free play on the lever and it releases the clutch perfectly. I also fitted a rocker shaft washer on the boss under the big nut, as described by Darbs on the Triples online forum, link below.

http://www.triplesonline.com/forum/getmsg.asp?178231

I think that the link should work. If not, let me know and I'll copy and paste it.

I also put the clutch basket in the lathe and adjusted the length of the fingers to get a lighter clutch, the same principle as the stack height in the Commando clutch, although I can't just remember the figures off hand now.

Although not quite as light as the Commando clutch, my T160 clutch is completely reliable without any problems.

I wondered for years if bigger balls would solve the problem. So I ordered some 17/64" and 9/32" to try. Installed the 9/32", fit the big end of the slots nicely, rolled nicely, and nothing changed. Scratched my head a while and then realized I was being a dummy. It simply means that the adjustment was further out - didn't change the slope of the ramps at all.

At least I no longed have to wonder - kind of embarrassing that I ever did!

BTW, got a new Barnett cable - also a bad idea. The free length is about 1/4" too short (no adjustment available) and the actuator end, while it works, is the wrong shape.

I had a buddy bought a Trident the first year they came and 'Lord!' did that thing scream..... Then later problems began to arise and I don't think it ever ran again... burned up the mid cylinder, and then he died in an auto crash. Kind of left me with a subliminal impression of triple trumpets being bad luck since then. He might still be here had he bought the new Commando he was looking at when he acquired the trumpet because he was driving to San Antonio to buy trumpet parts upon his demise. Commando parts were available locally at that time..... Boggles my mind also drawing such conclusions.

Matchless said:

I fitted a hydraulic set up to a friends T160 a few years ago & that gave a slight improvement. It came from LP Williams & used a 10mm bore M/C, which if I remember correctly gave 0.027" actual lift. Can't remember the slave cylinder dia. I calculated it at the time & I think it should have given 0.032"lift. With an 11mm bore M/C it would be better & still easy to operate. The good thing with the hydraulic set up is there is no need for free play as with a cable, also as things heat up the lift remains constant.

Click to expand...

I tried a hydraulic clutch on my T160 years ago, I could never stop the lower olive blowing. In the end I just went back to the standard cable.