I looked in my Haynes book and my official factory workshop manual, and they show the same arrangement: the cone-shaped ends of the two pistons face each other, with a spring between them.
I don't even see how the M/C could work if the secondary piston was backwards. The secondary valve stem is attached to the rear of the secondary piston by the "thimble" thingy, and without all those parts working properly the rear wheel circuit could not operate properly. Do you even have the secondary valve stem? When you get it back together properly, you may be amazed how much better your brakes work... Doug Braun '72 Spit --- Jim Cullen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > My question today is this - after extracting it I > realized that the secondary > piston appearred to have been installed backwards > (i.e. the secondary piston > was installed so it did not engage with the spring > instead the valve seal unit > engaged with the spring). The expanded view of the > master cylinder in the > Haynes manual suggests that this is backwards. > However, noting that the brakes > worked for approx. 8 years the way that the master > cylinder was setup prior to > me attempting to rebuild I wanted to confirm that > the Haynes expanded view is > the correct orientation of the internal parts of the > master cylinder. I am > leaning towards the fact that the garage I had > rebuild the master cylinder > eight years ago screwed up, but you know the saying > "measure twice and cut > once" so I thought I would double check. Your messages not reaching the list? Check out http://www.team.net/posting.html === This list supported in part by The Vintage Triumph Register === http://www.vtr.org === Help keep Team.Net on the air === http://www.team.net/donate.html === unsubscribe/change address requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or try === http://www.team.net/cgi-bin/majorcool === Other lists available at === http://www.team.net/mailman/listinfo === Archives at http://www.team.net/archive === http://www.team.net/the-local === Edit your replies!
