MG-Cars.info

Welcome to our Site for MG, Triumph and Austin-Healey Car Information.

Parts

MG parts spares and accessories are available for MG T Series (TA, MG TB, MG TC, MG TD, MG TF), Magnette, MGA, Twin cam, MGB, MGBGT, MGC, MGC GT, MG Midget, Sprite and other MG models from British car spares company LBCarCo.

MG MGF Technical - Door cheater changes

After a few years of no leaks, I have once again suffered the 'water over speakers' problem in the torrential rain we have had over the last week or so.

I already have the 'tube in door seal' fix, and hopefully, the correct window adjustment, but I've been looking at the cheaters again. Mine seem to have a noticeable gap down the outer rear edge between the glass and the rear edge of the cheater.

On a 1996 'N' reg car, is this normal?

Secondly, looking at the EPC, there hace been 3 revisions since the initial design.

E.G. RH Seal Assembly - front door cheater:-
Part number CFE101860 was superceded by CFE101861
Part number CFE101861 was superceded by CFE102900
Part number CFE102900 was superceded by CFE103020

Does anybody know what these changes were and what they affected ?

Tony
Tony Thompson

Hi Tony,

I think *no worries*, cause there had been no changes with the cheaters regarding fitment and design principals.
Which part from above list you ever order, it will fit.

Most *superceded by* in the EPC had to be done according to EC WEEE (RoHS) rules.
All good old Chrome IV (yellow _chrome effect_ ..spelling??) surface treatments had to be replaced with none hazardous surface treatments.

I'm not shure, but I assume that MGR changed all p/n within their RoHS check routines two or three years ago. This regards mainly to *lead free* materials and *Chrome VI* surfaces, but aswell to PVC plastic.

I.E. have a look to the front window section. (lead free)
:)
Or see why they changed the good old PVC plastic rear window to the latest glass rear window
:))
They would have not be allowed to sell MG TF in mid of 2006 with any hazardous materials included. This means cars built one year before that date must be WEEE/RoHS conformal. One year at least, cause cars sometimes rest for one year in stocks before they could be sold.

I'm quite busy currently in our company with that RoHS stuff. So some background on the matters from my side.

My point of view
:)

Cheers
Dieter

Dieter

Dieter,

That certainly makes sense - we too (at the office) are steadily having to review items to comply with RoHs requirements - a real pain !

I've looked at other cars and have not spotted any obvious physical differences, but I wondered if MGR had made any attempt to overcome the notorious leak problems. (or am I hoping for too much? ;-)

Tony
Tony Thompson

Errr, technicians never _hope_ ;)
They are _convinced_ that a part or system will work .... under planned circumstances .....

Wherein the only problem are these mad circumstances.
(LOL)
- Door Lock bracket adjustment
- condition of the hood to window seal
- Window height
- Window adjustment (angles and distances in all directions)
;-)
Dieter

Dieter, how could you be such a cynic ! LOL
T

>> Mine seem to have a noticeable gap down the outer rear edge between the glass and the rear edge of the cheater. <<

Mine has this too Tony. And there is no scope for adjustment either. The different part numbers probably refer to whether they are intended for use with manual or electric adjustable door mirrors - but in fact, they are all the same.

Purchased a pair of new(er) cheeters from the MGF centre and intend to see whether I can get better alignment.

I also intend to replace the A-pillar seal!
Rob Bell

Rob,

As you might have gathered, I changed the A frame seal several years ago, but I am not convinced as to exactly where the water ingress occurs.

The idea of the 'tube in seal' is quite good, but I'm wondering if it gets in around the rear outer edge of the cheater, especially near the top, and then bleeds across somehow via the mirror linkage, coming out at the bottom of the cheater on the inside. I only seem to get this leak when the car is static - i.e. no wind to push the water clear of the cheater.

Maybe if I seal that edge with insulation tape and apply a hose spray, I might get a better idea?

Tony
Tony Thompson

Just an idea with fitment of the part.
Did you check this bolts ?
http://www.mgfcar.de/adjust/cheater_cp_0465.jpg
B and C are prone to get loose and the thread in the alloy cheater is also known as not very reliable.

In my car the part is broken blow the bolts since about 5 years, but almost seal. (Broken from Dealer works when trying to adjust)
Dieter

Dieter, yes, looked at this - and there wasn't a problem.

Spoke to Victoria and gang about it - they reckon that the verticle support that the cheeter sits on has bent. I bought a couple of 'new' ones, and will compare...

Tony, yup - you're part of the inspiration to replace the seal on my car! LOL Mine is the original, and after 10 years is probably well past its 'use by' date.
Rob Bell

Hi,

Funny as I have just replaced my A post seal tonight and have tried to adjust the cheaters.

Rob, do you mean the mounting points on the door? As the vertical support is part of the runner for the window. The adjuster at the bottom of the runner gives some movement in and out.

The thing I did do was to slide the window forward so it now has a much neater fit on the cheater. ???

AndrewMc

Yes, that's the part Andrew. I am sure that the window runner component is fine, but it may be distorted towards the top where the Cheeter is mounted to it. I don't know this - but when I get time, I'll strip the door down and compare parts etc :o)
Rob Bell

Rob,
the rail is screwed on to the cheater alloy body with two bolts.
http://www.mgfcar.de/window/cheater_dcp_1602.jpg
(see the thread ends. Bolt heads hidden in the runner.)
http://www.mgfcar.de/window/cheater.htm

Regards
Dieter
Dieter

Interesting, thanks Dieter. Not looked yet, but do these two mounting bolts provide any adjustment?
Rob Bell

No, they don't.
I think any misalignement is caused by to much force either with inwards or outwards direction of the cheater.
The section between rail and strong alloy body looks _weak_ and is prone to break. The material shape gets restricted from the thread hole for the upper inner fixture.

Bent force from wrong adjustment at the bottom rail fixture can happen. If done wrong, then the top tip of the cheater gets pushed deep into the door seal. This looks good and seal on first hand, but applies a lot of force to it.

Hope this makes sense. See the cheater with runner as a lever with rotation center (_centre_ located at the upper both cheater fixture.
Adjusting the lower rail bolt in direction road-side
= increase pressure to the cheater tip ... until it bends or breaks
Adjusting the lower rail bolt in direction cabin
= decrease pressure to the cheater tip .. until it's directing none parallel to the window frame _outwards_ with unwanted gap.

The LH cheater at my car got broken after my very last workshop visit four five ago. Just at that fixture thread location. They had done warranty works to get the car seal there. I got a spare cheater FOC to install it myself, but never did.

btw, regarding part numbers:
There is no difference between cheaters for _motor mirror_ or manual mirrors.
All delivered spare cheaters have the slot for the mirror lever pre-marked, but closed.
You need to cut the slot finish with a sharp knife for the lever if required.
Dieter

Thanks Dieter, yes, that makes a lot of sense.

So returning to Tony's original question:
>>
Secondly, looking at the EPC, there hace been 3 revisions since the initial design.

E.G. RH Seal Assembly - front door cheater:-
Part number CFE101860 was superceded by CFE101861
Part number CFE101861 was superceded by CFE102900
Part number CFE102900 was superceded by CFE103020

Does anybody know what these changes were and what they affected ?
<<

How do these part numbers work if the parts that we're talking about remain the same? What seal assembly are we discussing?

Time to look up the on line EPC! :o)
Rob Bell

Rob,

Dieter is suggesting that the dimensional aspects of the cheeaters has remained the same, but the material has changed because of the need to meet new material specifications, etc. The part numbers have therfore had to change.

As for the 'A' frame seal, the one I used in 2002 was RCFE108350 SEAL PRIMARY DOOR 'A' FRAME @ £ 36.40 (2002), but I do not have access to the EPC at the moment, so this may have changed.

Tony
Tony

Okay, that makes sense.

Tony, have you seen Dieter's new on-line EPC? http://www.lame-delegation.de/mgfcar.de/epc/
Rob Bell

This thread was discussed between 31/07/2005 and 08/08/2005

MG MGF Technical index

This thread is from the archives. Join the live MG MGF Technical BBS now