Flywheel numbers

[Hugz]

I think Keith was talking about the top of the drive shaft tube Jon.

Could be the box and tube was replaced as one. Easier than separating the box.

[Keith.P]

If at all possible, could I see a picture the HSD's top drive tube mount, without the transom in the way.
The shape of the top collar is different to all the others I have seen, even if it's not original to the motor or only used on this motor, its not the same as any other drive tube.

[Charles uk]

I thought we had cleared up the 3 or 4 bladed prop & the drive shaft tube length questions Jon.
Mind you a public debate might add some interest.

We always thought that the "H" was a carry on from the Marston era & H meant "high thrust".

There is only one drive shaft tube (length/style) listed for the wartime period Keith.
On careful inspection it does look strange!

[Hugz]

My interest in driveshaft length is if a third party bought a volume of motors from the ministry and modified them for the consumer market. So far there doesn't seem to be any conformity on the cut down length which would negate my theory.

[Oyster 49]

I've just been looking at the top of that driveshaft. Is it an odd finish, because the zinc coating happens to be in very good condition there?

Anyway an interesting engine for sure. THe HSD was obviously not created in any number, we would have seen a few more if they did. Maybe, late on in the war the ministry of supply realised they did not really need to upgrade any more as they already had loads of engines ready to be sold off as surplus. A big belt tightening excercise was about to start!

Loads of kit ended up getting scrapped at the end of the war, including brand new bomber aircraft and even ships. As soon as contracts were complete the items became immediate surplus.

[Charles uk]

It's a different shape!

[headdownarseup]

3 or 4 blades have not yet got a satisfactory answer. Not to me anyway. A public debate i look forward to. To my untrained eye, if it doesn't look right it probably isn't right, hence the reason why i asked whether or not the 3 bladed prop was actually designed to be used on 102 plus in the first place. And to my eye they just don't look right at all. I've seen quite a few bronze versions of this 3 bladed prop fitted onto inboard powered dinghies before now and always thought that an aluminium version of the same prop could be considered as a "cheap fix" in a time of need. 3 blades instead of the normal 4 might have a slight increase in overall usability when fitted to a plus gearbox, and possibly a few extra revs, but even so they just don't look right to me. Surface area i can understand for pushing big heavy loads as these engines are certainly not about going fast or being stealthy! No sir. They're anything but stealthy . The smog trail and noise would soon give you away

From experience of using my own AHC and THC i can tell you first hand they're not a fast or powerful motor to use. They're often noisy, very noisy in fact compared to the conventional sized 102's, they're also a darn sight heavier than their counterparts.Not to mention SLOW! That's not why i like them. I like them because not many other people like them or prefer to use the more recognisable motors of the same era. Some it's true have probably had a gearbox swap by now anyway, just like this one,which is a shame to me as i like to see the rest of the motor to be true to what the serial number tells you what it should be.

Torque tubes, particularly at the point just underneath the 2 studs/nuts that hold the lower unit on. From what i've seen so far, the vast majority of early 102's including the SD range don't have what i term as a "steering lock". A funny looking square or oblong bit of metal that protrudes downwards away from the flange. With one of these later mounting lugs in place its easy to see the purpose of this protrusion. It acts like a steering lock giving approx. 45 degrees port/starboard of steering capability. Older motors don't have this unless lots of other bits have been replaced along the way. This 102 has a later mounting lug made from ally and black plastic which just adds to the confusion. As this has a later transom mounting anyway, the other parts that go with it are probably of the same or similar age as the "additions". This one though does look a bit "odd" at the top of its shaft. Is it part of the original finish or is there another "addition". (perhaps to cover up a previous "bodge")

Now Chas., as far as tube length goes, did we ever get to the bottom of how long an SDP should be? From memory, Rene's poll a while ago was inconclusive. And what about the gearboxes on those as well? If you're saying there is only 1 tube length for a genuine ww2 motor then that would make them long shaft. Is this correct? Everybody should be able to use a tape measure though, shouldn't they?

I saw that so called "wartime barge pusher" not that long ago and at the time i thought jeez what a hunk of junk! I've seen other better ones for sale if you want to call them "wartime barge pushers" of sorts, although they were mostly made from spare parts and a lot cheaper to buy in the first place. Still, each to their own i suppose.


If Hugo would like to send me a copy of the 46 seagull paperwork concerning the HSD i'd be more than happy to take a look at it.
and yes, i know i haven't sent you the previous register yet! I'm getting there slowly. I've got a lot on my plate at the moment besides seagull stuff.


Jon

[seagull101]

I have the same powerhead cover as the crated one.
I also have brass tank mounts with the jubilee clip style clamps!

Pics attached of both (seconds before the dog grabs the cover!)

Jacob

[Piglola123]

The cover is the same as I got it has proper stitching etc it is of proper construction to last I am hoping the pictures arrive ok u will see one has tapered top but no stops as you mentioned I only have the sd as ref and it has similar but has shoulder stop I will send pics as probably easier to see than explain
Regards

[Keith.P]

It looks to be a much stickier top mount than the standard SD, Lucky you noticed it.

[Charles uk]

Do you think that someone has retubed it Keith? the ID would perhaps answer the question.

[Hugz]

If Hugo would like to send me a copy of the 46 seagull paperwork concerning the HSD i'd be more than happy to take a look at it. Jon

Not I, Jon.

[Keith.P]

Not that I really want to know the answer, just thinking out loud, the HSD is basically a barge pusher, anyone seen a original transom for said motor, would you retube than re-plate said drive tube, or is it original.
Or is it just know one knows.

[Keith.P]

Double post.

[headdownarseup]

As there's very little actually known about these HSD's, for now all we go on is what the other motors look like within the same lineage (SD's and SDP's for example)and make comparisons accordingly. Educated guesses can sometimes pay off, but if i were a betting man i would say that BS at that time were churning out these things in such a short amount of time that to manufacture a bespoke tube for just one motor type, the HSD, would give rise to more costs to the production.
I think one generic type of tube fitted to all 3 types of motor just to keep things easy and simple.
I can start to see (i think) why some of these SD series motors had a "height adjuster" already fitted to them.(basically the same clamp that holds the carb onto the cylinder) With this odd looking arrangement at the top of the tube instead of a square shoulder there's no real need to have the engine bearer rubbing against a square shoulder as it's not going to be touching the top of the tube rather than against the bottom of the "collar" that's fastened around it. Goes back to the question of whether all the SD range was longshaft or not? This might be a possible answer here for the slight difference in the overall condition of the tube in this area. The plating does look very good for the first couple of inches in this area.There's only one real way to settle this and that's to dismantle this particular HSD and take a closer look at the inside of the tube for signs of previous welding and to see if there are any other witness marks over the rest of the upper part of the tube.

Transom brackets we can speculate the obvious here, for my money though i'd be leaning towards the type "b" No2 bracket, in the spares list referred to as " Gunmetal boat bracket for fixing to either side of folding boat, Mark III "
If there were any great number of these left over after the war they probably went through the same treatment as most of the others and ended up with a typical post-war bracket to attach them to a conventional type of boat, which we've seen all manner of different bracket types before now. It's possible i suppose that some of them may have had a gearbox swap at the same time when Mr. Bray got his hands on the surplus. You never know.

Other than that i don't know (yet)
What say the rest of you

Jon