Nourish question...

Fast Eddie

VIP MEMBER
Joined
Oct 4, 2013
Messages
20,587
Country flag
I know someone selling some Nourish stuff. Amongst which is a Nourish barrel he thought was from an 8 valve conversion for a T140.

I asked him to measure the height between base gasket and head gasket surfaces, and he tells me it’s approx 150mm.

Given that a T140 is closer to 100mm, this doesn’t seem right to me. Even in a full Nourish engine with a longer stroke and longer rods I can’t see the barrels being close to that height.

Can anyone shed any light on this?
 
Hi FE,



The 850 (77.81mm bore) NRE barrel I have measures 118mm from base gasket to head gasket.

The 750 (73.04mm bore) NRE barrel I have measures 115mm from base gasket to head gasket.

(Both engines had the same 88.5 mm stroke)

The 950 engines are shown as having a 5mm longer stroke than the 750/850s so I don’t think that would account for your friend’s measurement.

It looks to me that possibly your friend measured from the cylinder head gasket to the bottom of the cylinder liner instead, to come up with the 150 mm measurement.

The sticky out part of the cylinder liner measure 22.5 mm so this still doesn’t quite seem to account for the difference.

The above measurements are all for NRE engines rather than Triumph T140s



Hope this is of some help.
 
Thank you, you have pretty much confirmed my thoughts.

Just to confirm, your measurements are with ‘long’ 6.5 inch con rods ?
 
Hi FE,



The 850 (77.81mm bore) NRE barrel I have measures 118mm from base gasket to head gasket.

The 750 (73.04mm bore) NRE barrel I have measures 115mm from base gasket to head gasket.

(Both engines had the same 88.5 mm stroke)

The 950 engines are shown as having a 5mm longer stroke than the 750/850s so I don’t think that would account for your friend’s measurement.

It looks to me that possibly your friend measured from the cylinder head gasket to the bottom of the cylinder liner instead, to come up with the 150 mm measurement.

The sticky out part of the cylinder liner measure 22.5 mm so this still doesn’t quite seem to account for the difference.

The above measurements are all for NRE engines rather than Triumph T140s



Hope this is of some help.
'The sticky out part' !!!! Can you keep it simple so us laymen have half a chance, please :) :)
 
I know someone selling some Nourish stuff. Amongst which is a Nourish barrel he thought was from an 8 valve conversion for a T140.

I asked him to measure the height between base gasket and head gasket surfaces, and he tells me it’s approx 150mm.

Given that a T140 is closer to 100mm, this doesn’t seem right to me. Even in a full Nourish engine with a longer stroke and longer rods I can’t see the barrels being close to that height.

Can anyone shed any light on this?
Be very careful here. If the 'someone' is a guy called Chris Bushell, and his company is Nourish Engineering, steer well clear.
PM me if you need any details...
 
Be very careful here. If the 'someone' is a guy called Chris Bushell, and his company is Nourish Engineering, steer well clear.
PM me if you need any details...

No fear Champy, I’m familiar enough with Bushell to know to steer clear! It was a guy selling some stuff privately but I left it and I th I’m he sold it all anyway.

BTW, do you know what’s happening in the whole sorry Bushell / NRE story ?
 
No fear Champy, I’m familiar enough with Bushell to know to steer clear! It was a guy selling some stuff privately but I left it and I th I’m he sold it all anyway.

BTW, do you know what’s happening in the whole sorry Bushell / NRE story ?
Well... After postponements and delays due to Covid 19, plus the overload at the Courts, a video link court case will be happening in August. I have sent all the details, photos etc., of the issues, including the mainshaft (which wasn't machined correctly), and the costs involved. Interestingly, he has never responded or communicated with me since way before my request for refund and subsequent court threats. He has just merely told the court he will defend the case. It will be really enlightening to hear what he has to say...
 
Well... After postponements and delays due to Covid 19, plus the overload at the Courts, a video link court case will be happening in August. I have sent all the details, photos etc., of the issues, including the mainshaft (which wasn't machined correctly), and the costs involved. Interestingly, he has never responded or communicated with me since way before my request for refund and subsequent court threats. He has just merely told the court he will defend the case. It will be really enlightening to hear what he has to say...

Well, good luck with the case, and do keep us posted.
 
Hi Champy
Strange as it sounds I on Facebook have had several replys, links, offers of I can do that for you!
I never bring up my mates deposit & 2 year oops plus wait.
I do give the nod to others.
 
He has just merely told the court he will defend the case.

Courts require full disclosure of the defence in writing before the hearing, on the day ambushes are not allowed. If he does just turn up without a defence already submitted to the court and yourself (he is duty bound to give you a copy in advance and not rely on the court sending you a copy of theirs) then you ask for summary judgement in your favour as no defence has been supplied.
 
Courts require full disclosure of the defence in writing before the hearing, on the day ambushes are not allowed. If he does just turn up without a defence already submitted to the court and yourself (he is duty bound to give you a copy in advance and not rely on the court sending you a copy of theirs) then you ask for summary judgement in your favour as no defence has been supplied.
Yes, I did wonder about that, as I have sent various documents to him (as well as the Court), but never received anything from him. I sent by signed for service, so he can't say he didn't receive them. My guess is that he won't be there, and then it'll end with bailiffs, as I'm sure he won't pay up.
 
There is one document he sends to the court and the court sends you a copy, can't remember which one but it may be the acknowledgement, where he either admits his guilt or states he will defend. From there on in he had a timetable to follow and the last one is to file a defence at least 28 days before the hearing, the court may have set this date already.

If you want to be more prepared yourself then private parking tickets are much the same, ie small claims and based on contract law.

Here is the completed cases section from Pepipoo, pick the private parking cases that went to small claims.

 
There is one document he sends to the court and the court sends you a copy, can't remember which one but it may be the acknowledgement, where he either admits his guilt or states he will defend. From there on in he had a timetable to follow and the last one is to file a defence at least 28 days before the hearing, the court may have set this date already.

If you want to be more prepared yourself then private parking tickets are much the same, ie small claims and based on contract law.

Here is the completed cases section from Pepipoo, pick the private parking cases that went to small claims.

Thanks for that. Interesting reading. If he has admitted guilt, would the case continue? Definitely not received any paperwork...
Onwards and upwards as they say!
 
If at Ihe acknowledgement stage he had accepted the case was correct then you would have won at that point and been awarded judgement. What I would do at this point is to ring the court and ask what has been submitted, if he has been submitting to the court and not to you then you write to the court telling them so. He has a lot more experience of court than you do expect slippery behaviour.
 
If at Ihe acknowledgement stage he had accepted the case was correct then you would have won at that point and been awarded judgement. What I would do at this point is to ring the court and ask what has been submitted, if he has been submitting to the court and not to you then you write to the court telling them so. He has a lot more experience of court than you do expect slippery behaviour.
Good idea. Will do, thanks.
 
Ian
Any update mate? People are still pointing people to Nourish.
 
Unfortunately yes. Slippery is not the word! Video call made by the court. He was driving on M6 and his camera pointing at the roof of his car! Judge then stated that as Nourish Engineering (aka Chris Bushell) had been dissolved in December, there was no possibility of recovering any expenses. Judge asked if he had informed me, and he vaguely replied that he thought he had sent me an email in January. Lie. Judge was very sympathetic, and stated she wished she could do more. She asked him if he had anything to say, and he mumbled something about it not being his fault the Company was dissolved, and then asked me if I wanted to say anything. I called him every name under the sun: cheat, liar, conman, thief, etc., and the judge didn't bat an eyelid.
So, the slime ball wins again. I can only hope that one day, someone will extract the correct revenge on this pitiful example of humanity.
My last words? DO NOT DEAL WITH THIS GUY - CHRIS BUSHELL - UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES, YOU WILL LOSE YOUR MONEY, OR GET DEFECTIVE PARTS WITH NO RECOURSE.
 
Back
Top