And another thing: I understand that a Lodge C! spark plug is the item of choice. What (if any) is the modern equivelent please?
Also, would the substitution of a H1 or H3 do anything for smoke reduction in the same way that it is claimed a D9 will over a D16?
102 AC 14685 swap?
Moderators: John@sos, charlesp, Charles uk, RickUK, Petergalileo
-
Charles uk
- Posts: 4954
- Joined: Wed Feb 27, 2008 4:38 pm
- Location: Maidenhead Berks UK
Re: 102 AC 14685 swap?
Seagull 102's are a low tech, low compression, a 1940's technology engine & any 18mm plug will do the job, I doubt you'll detect any difference between any of the 18mm plugs.
Make it idiot proof and someone will make a better idiot.
-
fleetingcontact
- Posts: 275
- Joined: Sat Aug 15, 2015 6:47 pm
- Location:
Re: 102 AC 14685 swap?
I'll just have to try it then.
Re: 102 AC 14685 swap?
It is not uncommon for the gearbox end cap to be replaced with a oil filler cap. Quite sensible. ED has a CDI ignition and a later amal carb. They have a variety of transom brackets and tanks. Mine has ali transom bracket and long range steel tank (yuk).
Advantage of early 102's is the long shaft can have an adjustable height collar added (or jubilee clip). They are quieter too. My early AD is my most used motor. Brass tank. Mk1villiers mag. Triple nipples, straight out exhaust. I push an inflatable metzeler so I rarely go over one third throttle. Yep, oil stain is embarrassing. Keep meaning to try olive oil for environmental reasons and aroma. Whether it provides enough lubrication is yet to be seen.
Advantage of early 102's is the long shaft can have an adjustable height collar added (or jubilee clip). They are quieter too. My early AD is my most used motor. Brass tank. Mk1villiers mag. Triple nipples, straight out exhaust. I push an inflatable metzeler so I rarely go over one third throttle. Yep, oil stain is embarrassing. Keep meaning to try olive oil for environmental reasons and aroma. Whether it provides enough lubrication is yet to be seen.
-
fleetingcontact
- Posts: 275
- Joined: Sat Aug 15, 2015 6:47 pm
- Location:
Re: 102 AC 14685 swap?
Hi Hugz
I guess you know that, in the glory days of two-stoke motorcycle racing, castor oil was sometimes used. It provided exceptional lubrication and sealing qualities allowing very high RPM. But the downside was that it also produced exceptional amounts of coke, which meant that any race motor used in this way generally required a rebuild after each race... Ultimately better two-stroke oils were developed.
A goodly while ago Performance Bikes Magazine hired their first female journo. She was let loose on the PB long-term test Aprillia RS250. It siezed. Turned out she'd been using cheapo oil which ruined the engine of course. Ok, that was a very exotic piece of kit. The only real similarity between that engine and a Seagull is that they are both two-strokes but I think it illustrates the case for the use of the best oils. And, if you can be bothered, bio-degradeable stuff has to be better for other reasons.
I like the idea of olive oil a lot though. You couldn't argue it isn't bio-degradeable! Someone once said that the Seagull engine will happily run on Castrol R as a substitute, or maybe even standard engine oil, so it doesn't seem too fussy but I have no idea how true those claims might be. If you do try it we all want to know the result.
I guess you know that, in the glory days of two-stoke motorcycle racing, castor oil was sometimes used. It provided exceptional lubrication and sealing qualities allowing very high RPM. But the downside was that it also produced exceptional amounts of coke, which meant that any race motor used in this way generally required a rebuild after each race... Ultimately better two-stroke oils were developed.
A goodly while ago Performance Bikes Magazine hired their first female journo. She was let loose on the PB long-term test Aprillia RS250. It siezed. Turned out she'd been using cheapo oil which ruined the engine of course. Ok, that was a very exotic piece of kit. The only real similarity between that engine and a Seagull is that they are both two-strokes but I think it illustrates the case for the use of the best oils. And, if you can be bothered, bio-degradeable stuff has to be better for other reasons.
I like the idea of olive oil a lot though. You couldn't argue it isn't bio-degradeable! Someone once said that the Seagull engine will happily run on Castrol R as a substitute, or maybe even standard engine oil, so it doesn't seem too fussy but I have no idea how true those claims might be. If you do try it we all want to know the result.
-
Charles uk
- Posts: 4954
- Joined: Wed Feb 27, 2008 4:38 pm
- Location: Maidenhead Berks UK
Re: 102 AC 14685 swap?
If you've ever tried unsticking a seized racing outboard that's used Castrol R or the like & has been left standing for more the 6 months, the gum it leaves behind is horrible & isn't very soluble in petrol, white spirit, diesel, carbon tetrachloride, chloroform or acetone I've tried the lot, though some will soften it.
But to us old boys if smells magic!
Remember that Seagull bearing clearances were not designed for low viscosity fully synthetics.
But to us old boys if smells magic!
Remember that Seagull bearing clearances were not designed for low viscosity fully synthetics.
Make it idiot proof and someone will make a better idiot.
-
headdownarseup
- Posts: 2484
- Joined: Thu Apr 04, 2013 2:26 pm
- Location: bristol
Re: 102 AC 14685 swap?
Martin.
8:1 can be a bit too much oil for some of these older gulls. The unused oil that the engine doesn't need for lubrication can at times foul the plug. This along with a smoky exhaust trail can lead to a lot of finger pointing and shaking of heads.
It's not the end of the world however, using a modern semi-synthetic or fully synthetic 2 stroke oil overcomes a lot of the problems. Reduced smoke levels, lower soot build up around the plug (although a lot depends on how high you keep the revs when using your gull as they like revving a bit higher for a cleaner burn) and some of these oils are bio-degradable so much better all round for those wanting to reduce their pollution.
10:1 seems to be roughly right for a lot of these older (pre 68) gulls. There's still more than enough oil within the fuel mix like this to cope with a lot of situations you could possibly wish to throw at your gull, and still maintain a very good level of lubrication throughout the engine's internals. A good proportion of oil ends up going straight out of the exhaust tube anyway, why waste it by having a very heavy oil content. Modern oils are VERY GOOD compared to the older mineral types.
Most of mine have been run at 10:1 for over 7 years now, with no signs of premature wear on any of the critical components. If anything, they could probably do with a slight alteration to perhaps 12 or 14:1 on these modern oils (despite what charles will tell you). Charles is a racer, whereas i'm a user. Charles is probably revving his engines higher than a seagull was designed to go, i'm running at normal speeds and normal loads. 2 very different outlooks here.
Don't forget that when AC14685 first left the factory there probably wasn't a purpose made 2 stroke oil readily available. I recall stories of used motor oil being used, filtered and mixed with petrol to get something near enough that would work in a seagull.
Seagulls really aren't that fussy at all. Hard as nails some of them.
Castrol R smells good, but it's expensive.(i used to run it in my 1071 cooper mini) Probably a big waste of money in an old seagull. Olive oil i can imagine will produce a fair bit of carbon, probably smell like a mobile fish'n'chip van too, but obviously bio-degradable if that's your thing.
102's are a fairly quiet motor to use compared to some of the later types.Most of my 102's manage to push a heavy 17 foot fibreglass boat along with no trouble. Often laden with 6 passengers at a time.
For me anyway, for a spark plug that's good in most situations D16.
My more cherished "oldies" run with an 8COM.
The choice is yours. It's your motor. Use it as you see fit.
Jon
8:1 can be a bit too much oil for some of these older gulls. The unused oil that the engine doesn't need for lubrication can at times foul the plug. This along with a smoky exhaust trail can lead to a lot of finger pointing and shaking of heads.
It's not the end of the world however, using a modern semi-synthetic or fully synthetic 2 stroke oil overcomes a lot of the problems. Reduced smoke levels, lower soot build up around the plug (although a lot depends on how high you keep the revs when using your gull as they like revving a bit higher for a cleaner burn) and some of these oils are bio-degradable so much better all round for those wanting to reduce their pollution.
10:1 seems to be roughly right for a lot of these older (pre 68) gulls. There's still more than enough oil within the fuel mix like this to cope with a lot of situations you could possibly wish to throw at your gull, and still maintain a very good level of lubrication throughout the engine's internals. A good proportion of oil ends up going straight out of the exhaust tube anyway, why waste it by having a very heavy oil content. Modern oils are VERY GOOD compared to the older mineral types.
Most of mine have been run at 10:1 for over 7 years now, with no signs of premature wear on any of the critical components. If anything, they could probably do with a slight alteration to perhaps 12 or 14:1 on these modern oils (despite what charles will tell you). Charles is a racer, whereas i'm a user. Charles is probably revving his engines higher than a seagull was designed to go, i'm running at normal speeds and normal loads. 2 very different outlooks here.
Don't forget that when AC14685 first left the factory there probably wasn't a purpose made 2 stroke oil readily available. I recall stories of used motor oil being used, filtered and mixed with petrol to get something near enough that would work in a seagull.
Seagulls really aren't that fussy at all. Hard as nails some of them.
Castrol R smells good, but it's expensive.(i used to run it in my 1071 cooper mini) Probably a big waste of money in an old seagull. Olive oil i can imagine will produce a fair bit of carbon, probably smell like a mobile fish'n'chip van too, but obviously bio-degradable if that's your thing.
102's are a fairly quiet motor to use compared to some of the later types.Most of my 102's manage to push a heavy 17 foot fibreglass boat along with no trouble. Often laden with 6 passengers at a time.
For me anyway, for a spark plug that's good in most situations D16.
My more cherished "oldies" run with an 8COM.
The choice is yours. It's your motor. Use it as you see fit.
Jon
-
fleetingcontact
- Posts: 275
- Joined: Sat Aug 15, 2015 6:47 pm
- Location:
Re: 102 AC 14685 swap?
Hi Charles, here's one you may not have come across...
Concentrated TFR (traffic film remover) will seemingly dissolve any hydrocarbon or its residue and also skin, flesh, etc. It's fantastic for cleaning the inside of fuel tanks. Leaves them absolutly spotless. The downside is that it also removes the paint nicely...
Lye (caustic soda) will do the same trick but it has a negative effect on alumunium alloy parts (smutting) where you will need nitric acid to remove the smutting. Nitric acid is easily found on the interweb, as is caustic soda in large quantities (don't buy it from the supermarket). This makes the process only suitable for alloy parts which are not machined to tolerance, since it also removes very small amounts of the material itself.
TFR also has a negative effect on aluminium alloy, as I have found, but is much less severe than lye.
Lye is also an excellent brass and bronze cleaner. TFR isn't as dangerous to human body parts as lye but care is still needed.
Maybe it's a Castrol R killer too. Buy some thick and long rubber gloves. I have no idea what TFR is composed of.
Martin.
Concentrated TFR (traffic film remover) will seemingly dissolve any hydrocarbon or its residue and also skin, flesh, etc. It's fantastic for cleaning the inside of fuel tanks. Leaves them absolutly spotless. The downside is that it also removes the paint nicely...
Lye (caustic soda) will do the same trick but it has a negative effect on alumunium alloy parts (smutting) where you will need nitric acid to remove the smutting. Nitric acid is easily found on the interweb, as is caustic soda in large quantities (don't buy it from the supermarket). This makes the process only suitable for alloy parts which are not machined to tolerance, since it also removes very small amounts of the material itself.
TFR also has a negative effect on aluminium alloy, as I have found, but is much less severe than lye.
Lye is also an excellent brass and bronze cleaner. TFR isn't as dangerous to human body parts as lye but care is still needed.
Maybe it's a Castrol R killer too. Buy some thick and long rubber gloves. I have no idea what TFR is composed of.
Martin.
-
fleetingcontact
- Posts: 275
- Joined: Sat Aug 15, 2015 6:47 pm
- Location:
Re: 102 AC 14685 swap?
Hi Jon
Really appreciate the usefull info. I'll save that one in the files. I have five (five!) unused Champion 8-com plugs, a used Lodge C1, a new Lodge C1, and also a new C3, H1 and H3 so plenty to choose from...I'm a bit obsessive sometimes...
Really appreciate the usefull info. I'll save that one in the files. I have five (five!) unused Champion 8-com plugs, a used Lodge C1, a new Lodge C1, and also a new C3, H1 and H3 so plenty to choose from...I'm a bit obsessive sometimes...
-
headdownarseup
- Posts: 2484
- Joined: Thu Apr 04, 2013 2:26 pm
- Location: bristol
Re: 102 AC 14685 swap?
no probs.-
fleetingcontact
- Posts: 275
- Joined: Sat Aug 15, 2015 6:47 pm
- Location:
Re: 102 AC 14685 swap?
So now we've got all the interesting chat out of the way, who's got a 102 motor for swapses?
-
Charles uk
- Posts: 4954
- Joined: Wed Feb 27, 2008 4:38 pm
- Location: Maidenhead Berks UK
Re: 102 AC 14685 swap?
From the age of 18 for 5 years I worked for Vanderval Products in the laboratory attached to the R & D dept, at that time Vandervals were the principle plain bearing manufacturer for the UK motor industry & some of their European counterparts, so I garnered a reasonable working knowledge of plain bearings & their limitations.
Seagull Pb2 main bearings work well under the loads imparted on them at normal maximum revs (circa 4000) & under racing revs up around 6000, providing the bearing clearances are within the limits, Seagull main bearings are prone to wear especially the top one with it's heavy flywheel loading.
This increased clearance is not initially a major problem as the increased bearing & crankshaft temperature in the high load areas cause more petrol to vaporise from the fuel oil particulate contained in the crankcase depositing oil which doesn't evaporate readily at temperatures much higher than this, so more lubricant in the high temperature areas.
This works ok until the wear increases to a point where there is sufficient clearance to permit the lubricant to be wiped/squeezed away from the high load area causing the oil film between the bearing & crankshaft to breakdown with sometimes disastrous results, spectacularly so when it's the big end bearing.
From this you will gather I'm not a great believer in rationing oil in my older toys & I've never had an oiled up spark plug so anything earlier than 46 gets 8 to 10:1, depending on condition, of TCW3; only my fully jewelled race motors get anything better than this, & they get fully synthetic @ 20:1.
Seagull Pb2 main bearings work well under the loads imparted on them at normal maximum revs (circa 4000) & under racing revs up around 6000, providing the bearing clearances are within the limits, Seagull main bearings are prone to wear especially the top one with it's heavy flywheel loading.
This increased clearance is not initially a major problem as the increased bearing & crankshaft temperature in the high load areas cause more petrol to vaporise from the fuel oil particulate contained in the crankcase depositing oil which doesn't evaporate readily at temperatures much higher than this, so more lubricant in the high temperature areas.
This works ok until the wear increases to a point where there is sufficient clearance to permit the lubricant to be wiped/squeezed away from the high load area causing the oil film between the bearing & crankshaft to breakdown with sometimes disastrous results, spectacularly so when it's the big end bearing.
From this you will gather I'm not a great believer in rationing oil in my older toys & I've never had an oiled up spark plug so anything earlier than 46 gets 8 to 10:1, depending on condition, of TCW3; only my fully jewelled race motors get anything better than this, & they get fully synthetic @ 20:1.
Make it idiot proof and someone will make a better idiot.
-
headdownarseup
- Posts: 2484
- Joined: Thu Apr 04, 2013 2:26 pm
- Location: bristol
Re: 102 AC 14685 swap?
That's fair enough Charles, but a lot has been talked about recently in how to reduce "pollution". Smoke levels, oil slicks etc. etc. and it's this that has become quite a big thing nowadays. More and more people are becoming conscious of the fact these seagulls are perhaps not the best when it comes to saving the planet in the long term. Most of the damage has already been done by now anyway, and probably long before any old 2 stroke engine was pushed into active service. But it's still something we shouldn't ignore either if we're going to be able to play with our gulls for much longer.
There seems to be a lot of interest in converting to 25:1 these days. I for one would tread very carefully with this with any of my cherished gulls. Have a little bit of faith in modern oils, they really are much better than a lot of folks make out. Plenty of advancements have been made over the last half century. Oil is just one of them.
Racing is one thing, using from an everyman's point of view is quite another.
Martin
Sorry, all of my 102's are spoken for at the moment.
There seems to be a lot of interest in converting to 25:1 these days. I for one would tread very carefully with this with any of my cherished gulls. Have a little bit of faith in modern oils, they really are much better than a lot of folks make out. Plenty of advancements have been made over the last half century. Oil is just one of them.
Racing is one thing, using from an everyman's point of view is quite another.
Martin
Sorry, all of my 102's are spoken for at the moment.
-
Charles uk
- Posts: 4954
- Joined: Wed Feb 27, 2008 4:38 pm
- Location: Maidenhead Berks UK
Re: 102 AC 14685 swap?
Martin what are you after I have several in storage that have to get gone in the next few months, place a wanted add.
Jon how much oil do you buy in a year?
Jon how much oil do you buy in a year?
Make it idiot proof and someone will make a better idiot.
-
fleetingcontact
- Posts: 275
- Joined: Sat Aug 15, 2015 6:47 pm
- Location:
Re: 102 AC 14685 swap?
Charles
Ideally I'd be lucky enough to find a complete motor coded WHC. If I can't then perhaps there's no point changing the motor I have - there would be no difference. Ok I'll post a 'wanted' ad. If you have one you don't want I'll give actual cash!
Jon
The present motor has one of those really nice brass water-jacket access port plugs. Any danger in moving it? Have you ever made a tool to move it or just used a BF screwdriver?
Ideally I'd be lucky enough to find a complete motor coded WHC. If I can't then perhaps there's no point changing the motor I have - there would be no difference. Ok I'll post a 'wanted' ad. If you have one you don't want I'll give actual cash!
Jon
The present motor has one of those really nice brass water-jacket access port plugs. Any danger in moving it? Have you ever made a tool to move it or just used a BF screwdriver?