Can anyone confirm whether or not this is an A10 Crankshaft?

[ADP91]

Stated Part no. 67-1221

http://www.ebay.com/itm/BSA-A-10-650-TRIUMPH-650-VINTAGE-CRANK-SHAFT-B2-/321375899741?hash=item4ad37f105d:m:mV30GVxVSMGU48IvPqON7nA&vxp=mtr

Cheers

[TT John]

Part number 67-1221 is the part number for the sludge trap tube in a pre unit crank A series but not sure what the D number is.

Regards TTJohn

[beezermacc]

It seems very non-standard. The t/s bush journal should have an oil groove - I suspect the journal has been sleeved for a needle roller conversion as there is also a quill for end feed oil pressure. There are more balance drillings than I've ever seen before and there are big-end wear tracks so even if it is an A10 I wouldn't plan on using it.

[rocker21]

i have seen another crank like this at the kempton bike jumble in the UK, it is an A10 but it has been modified, the timing side has been ground down and a sleve fitted for the needle roller conversion, so without the crankcases  it is useless , it can't be easily put back to standard. from what i could see of the one at Kempton it looks like a mod for racing  as the flywheel had been modified and loads of holes for balancing which  might mean it had lighter con rods and pistons ( maybe a short rod A10)  so without the rest of it, it has to be a no go.

[BVSR]

Hello,

I had this 1963 SR, despatched to BSA Inc. New Jersey on the 28th December 1962. Inside was (and is) this crank with strange flywheel. It seemed like Triumph's. I think now that was first fitted by the factory.

I have another 1963 SR, engine number DA10R8475,  despatched to same Place on the 12th November 1962. It has normal flywheel.

Cheers Markku

[trevinoz]

That "8898" must have been stamped after a long lunch!

[WozzA]

That "8898" must have been stamped after a long lunch!

or he was upside down ? 

[muskrat]

The grinder marks on the barrel flange might point to a re-stamp.
Cheers

[coater87]

The grinder marks on the barrel flange might point to a re-stamp.
Cheers

 I lived through the classic car restamp period, so I am going to go out on a lim and say not a restamp. Simply because the 8's look upside down. Those guys did everything in their power to make numbers look "right", but not have you look to hard at them. I bet everyone here who looked at that picture close thought the 8's looked off.

 Some guys got so good at the restamp the only way to tell was some kind of x-ray or something could see the old numbers where the metal had been compressed in the original stamping process.you would see two sets of numbers on a picture that looked like a photo negative.

[muskrat]

You could well be right Clive. Must have been a Friday arvo job
Cheers