BrianE

No resolution other than going to another station! Mentioned it to a friend of mine , who is in the petroleum industry, and he said they probably got replacement nozzles and an incorrect one got mixed up in the batch. Do those nozzles wear out?! Interesting about the gum. Hard to believe that's part of the calibration process! Something else to check for now.

My apologies for not getting the pics posted from the other one. I had it boxed up when I realized I forgot to take pics.

Hope the foot surgery went well!

That makes sense but I doubt that's the case as this particular Costco does not sell diesel. Thank you for the reply all the same. Next time I go to Costco, I'm taking a pair of calipers to measure the nozzle!

Just had an interesting thing happen after 18 years of Caterham ownership. I went to Costco this morning to fill up and the fuel nozzle would not fit into the fuel filler, the flap valve was simply too small. I normally fill up with non-ethanol at another station, with no problem, but given today is Sunday it was closed. Has anyone else experienced this and is there a known workaround? I'm not planning on carrying a funnel with me to fill up the car. Thank you.

I had ordered the Morgan MC from the eBay seller and I had mentioned that I installed it and I used a pressure bleeder and since it did not make a good seal with the threads, on the MC, it made a small mess of my engine bay. I thought I would not have an issue returning the MC but apparently I was mistaken. I want to relay the correspondence I have had with the eBay seller. Caveat emptor. Me: I use a pressure bleeder attached to the brake master cylinder to bleed my brakes. The cap I use fits a Girling master cylinder perfectly, unfortunately the cap does not seal well on this particular master cylinder and when I apply pressure it sprays out from underneath the cap and makes a mess. I would be willing to try another MC but if you do not think that will solve the problem I would prefer just returning this one. Thank you. Seller: This is a huge problem. You said it is defective because your pressure bleeder does not fit it. That makes it defective ? BS. Expect a big deduction from your refund for you using it. Me: Thank you for your replies. If you noticed, my initial correspondence was cordial. I never said the master cylinder was defective. Your description states "Dual Line Brake Master Cylinder Morgan 1977 - 1993. Master Cylinder Tag No 66147, with a stepped bore size 17.8mm." I am fully aware this is not a TRW/Girling produced master cylinder but given that it is a reproduction of said master cylinder I would expect it to function similar to an original. The threads for the cap on the master cylinder you sell are minutely undersized from a Girling one hence the issue I am experiencing. I have bled hundreds of Girling MCs and the cap I use fits perfectly on all of them. You can choose to run your business as you see fit. Since you state "Expect a big deduction from your refund for you using it" I most likely will not be returning it at this point.

I used an Eezibleed and the cap I use fits Girling MCs perfectly. The Morgan MC being sold by the eBay seller is not a Girling/TRW/Lockheed MC. It appears whatever mold was used to make the reservoir has enough of a difference from a true Girling one to not allow for an airtight seal. If you are interested in purchasing the MC I think the eBay seller has one remaining or I would be happy to sell you this one. As jbcollier recommended I am going to stick with TRW ones from now on or I will convert to a Tilton. I just want my Cat back on the road!

IamScotticus, just wondering if you received the GMC226 MC and how it worked out for you? I ordered the Morgan one from the eBay seller and got in installed. Unfortunately my pressure bleeder did not make a good seal with the threads and made a small mess of my engine bay, hence I am returning it and will most likely order a TRW Spitfire MC.

Just out of curiosity I removed the reservoir from the Spitfire MC I purchased on Amazon. The reservoir port for the secondary piston is smaller than the reservoir port on the Caterham MC hence the ID of the rubber seal is smaller as well. If the seal was in good shape (granted, this seal sees no movement) you could perhaps transfer it from the old MC to a Spitfire one. I don't know about the safety factors involved in doing this of course.

The MC for the Cat is identical to the one you posted the picture of just now including the pin that drops into the the secondary bore from above. It's interesting, yours is from a Mk4 Spitfire and the casting number on yours is identical to mine. Other things I've read say the MC on the Spitfire 1500 is identical to the Cat MC. I do not know much about the Triumph marque but I believe the 1500 was the successor to the Mk4, please correct me if I'm wrong. The only difference between your MC and the one from my Cat is the reservoir. My reservoir looks identical to the one on the initial post for this thread. Oh, of course, because its sloped!

Link for the Spit MC: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0066QUSW2?psc=1&ref=ppx_yo2ov_dt_b_product_details Not sure if the tank will swap over or not but it appears that it will. Based upon jbcollier's comment I will be returning the Chinese knockoff one. I'm on another forum with jbcollier and his opinions are very well respected. If he says he would not use one that's good enough for me! The casting number on the bottom of the Cat MC is "74660152 Q44." Not certain what the Q44 represents but I believe the first 8 digits are the important ones. My Cat MC looks identical to the one you started this thread with. I'd be happy to post a picture though if you would still like to see it, let me know. I've seen that before as well, using only Castrol brake fluid with TRW/Lockheed/Girling MCs. I honestly do not know if there is any substantial difference between Castrol and other brands. Just DO NOT USE DOT5 if you've been using DOT4 or DOT5.1. Why in the world they didn't come up with a different nomenclature for silicone brake fluid is beyond me, I have no doubt that people have mixed the two by mistake unfortunately. This is where some older Girling catalogs from the 80s and 90s would be very helpful!

Why I will be returning it to Amazon. The quality of the casting is poor in my opinion.

I wasn't very clear for which I apologize. I was simply trying to make sense of the band on the MC with the 62/38. I was thinking that if the bore is indeed .7" I would think the band would say 50/50.

I ordered one the other day from Amazon (Chinese import I believe) and it appears to be identical to the inexpensive ones various British car part suppliers provide as well. I also have one of the Morgan MCs on order, from the eBay seller, and that should arrive on Monday. I compared the Amazon one to my Cat MC and it does appear to be identical other than the reservoir tank just as you pointed out. The ports are M10x1.00 on both. The band on my Caterham Girling MC is "66147 03 50/50" and the one on the Amazon MC is "66070 05 38/62." I will be curious to see what the band says on the eBay one. My understanding is the 50/50 and 38/62 represents the rear/front pressure differential based upon the bore sizes of the MC. I can understand the 50/50 since it's a straight .7" bore but if the Amazon one is indeed a Spitfire replacement (which I thought was a straight .7" bore as well) I do not understand the 38/62. Of course I am most likely incorrect about it representing a pressure differential. I am not taking pressure differential valves into consideration of course. Any viewpoints as to whether those numbers do indeed represent pressure differentials?

I was curious about the black coating. Not familiar with the Morgan marque all that much. By the way, I like your tagline though I don't keep this mistress hidden!