Headlamp bucket

[Mdfatsi]

I'm reinstalling the headlamp buckets on my Mk. I with new hardware. The question I have is what do I do with this bit of hardware. It seems to me that the tabs need to be splayed out to hold the bucket ring to the bucket. Is this correct?

The tabs were broken off the old piece that I removed .

-Michael Fatsi

[sujitroy]

sounds and looks right from memory

[trunt]

Yup
one side with that splayed and the screw adjuster opposite (???). From the top of my head it may matter which way round. Use the other buckets to judge .. or someone will surely help

terry

[STypeR]

You are on the right track Michael. They need to be splayed out. As Trunt said check the opposite. Let me know if you need a photo of an original.

[Mdfatsi]

I am confused as to why this fastener was designed to be splayed. why? can I just use a regular nut and bolt instead as it will give me a much more positive connection. I realize that there has to be some movement hair for the headlight adjusters to work. but I'm not quite sure why these splayed fasteners have been employed.
Michael

[dasadrew]

I wouldn't go there if I were you! Trying to work out why British Leyland did this and that in the 70's could see you being admitted!

In any case, I'd think a split rivet is a lot cheaper to purchase and fit than a nut and bolt. 1 penny saved on each headlight on 30,000 cars is 120000 pennies!

Drew

[72BLUE]

......... I'm not quite sure why these splayed fasteners have been employed.
Michael

I can think of a few reasons:

1) a threaded fastener could work loose over time perhaps
2) a threaded fastener would be bigger (nut or bolt head) and be more problematic to fit in a compact area. Spanner or socket access would be tricky with the existing design.
3) a conventional nut and bolt would probably have to be fitted with the bolt head going behind the bowl, this would not allow the bowl to sit flush on the bodywork so an extra hole would need to be drilled in the bodywork.
4) in the above scenario with number 3, would it be possible to tighten the nut and bolt up?
5) to avoid the problems with 3 above, the bolt head would have to be a flat head type (similar to the head on the split rivet that is actually used) this would mean that it would rotate and not allow the nut to be fully tightened. It would therefore require welding to the bowl which would add to the cost of manufacture.
6) as Drew says, cost. I imagine a split rivet is cheaper than a nut and bolt.
7) maintenance and repair. After 40 years or so, I guess that the split rivet design is a damn sight easier to undo! Imagine the state of a small nut and bolt and the damage done in removal of it.
8) adjustment of headlamp. Although marginal, the split rivet design allows for a better/easier pivot of the headlamp ring during adjustment (nut and washer would have larger surface clamping area)

So well done BL, or more correctly Lucas? I would say that they got the design of the fitting bang on!


Cheers
Keith

[Ian F]

Keith,

With things like the bellhousing and starter motor bolts ( the need to be double jointed AND have hands the size of an infant), steering pump removal to change the battery, reversing light/inhibitor switch that’s inaccessible etc. do you honestly believe Triumph/BL/Leyland or whoever, gave a fig about spanner access or service replacement. It’s ALL about cost and £ saved.

Having said that, when you have engine removal to replace spark plugs or timing belts as some Italian pedigree engines, does it matter?

ian F