ok, I was a bit captivated looking back into the parts catalogues just now. They are so comprehensive on all the little bits.
So, a new thread. Someone propose the part from a screen grab as below, and first person to provide a real time pic of it in use (or in existence). Historic is acceptable. Keep it tight. Winner proposes new part. First one - BD131 from mid 1930! Didn't say it would be easy.
Screenshot 2024-07-15 at 08.25.27.png (Size: 207.61 KB / Downloads: 390)
You may find one (David Mawby enter, stage left) , but a lot of the drawings in the parts list are not very accurate and exhibit quite a bit of artistic licence, which can be a red herring in my experience.
In the past changing the illustrations in parts list was expensive. The drawings had to be generated manually and then the printing set up. A slow and expensive business.
Some manufacturers therefore didn't always change the illustrations which could be misleading. I know that Daimler certainly kept using old illustrations when components changed. They also didn't always add an illustration of parts that were added when a design change had happened.
It's the same with many machine tool parts manuals. While lots fall into the 'satisfactory' class, others must have been expensive to produce with wonderfully clear exploded-component drawings - or sectional ones taken from the original design drawing. Others took a shortcut and just laid the parts in 'assembly order' and took a photograph; some Russian and German ones were designed to help maintenance engineers in remote locations by including detailed dimensioned drawings of parts "subject to constant wear".
..... ....Daimler certainly kept using old illustrations when components changed. They also didn't always add an illustration of parts that were added when a design change had happened.
Not only Daimler. The well known make I spent most of my working life repairing was also guilty of this. Just one example, for a least three revisions of one particular workshop manual, they used an illustration of the superseded conventional push rod cylinder head from previous generation of the same model to illustrate certain service routines, when the model that the manual was actually written and supplied for was ohc. The text was correct but the pictures were not. Also, the bane(s) of my life, inaccurate wiring schematics, as in incorrect colours, circuits included which didn't exist in the production model, circuits omitted which should've been there, test specifications missing. Turned out the parent company had dispensed with their technical writers and illustrators as a cost-cutting exercise, so we were using the non-proofread 'beta version' of the service information, if you like.
FFS! I think we can all agree that the description 'Rubber glove for dynamo cable' means it's going to be something birfucated, rubber and glovelike and plainly having a purpose related to the listing of somewhere near the dynamo. So the visuals arent really that important... but having an impetus for remembering some possibly undisturbed part might get us somewhere. I've never seen one that does that sort of thing which is why I posted.
I agree, Ruaridh, it could well be David, but equally in wiring piled in parts sheds perhaps...!
I only posted this because I think the forum need a bit of enlivening for the benefit of the younger newbies who may tune in and decide whether they want to stay :-)
40 years ago i went to commission a ships engine in Calcutta, it soon became obvious that the water pump drive shaft bearings were failing. it was dismantled and the bearing arrangement had been changed and looked nothing like the parts book diagram.
Screenshot 2024-07-15 at 08.25.27.png (Size: 207.61 KB / Downloads: 390)
