The question is, do I use it or not?

The way I see it, it's been around a long time, at one time it was cutting edge technology (I expect...wasn't around myself)so why not use it...better than letting the bushes dry out surely.

Sod the election...this is far more important...so arguments for and against please.

My previous Morgan (4/4 4-seater 1991) had the one shot oiling system which I used regularly the first 2 years every 1500 kms.
Then I was advised by fellow Morganeers and the importer not to use it anymore because of obvious reasons such as inefficient greasing (liquid oil vs pasty grease), spoiling of oil on the front suspension and worse the disc brakes and wheel rims, risk of blocking the oil switch in the open position.
Nevertheless regular greasing of the front suspension is of paramount importance (every 2500 kms or less) to keep it in good order and assure its efficiency.
Doing so I did 67000kms with one set of kingpins and bushes before noticeable wobbling of the front wheels appeared and changing was necessary.
By the way , the works abandoned this oiling system and put ordinary grease nipples on top of the kingpins (difficult to reach with the front wheels on!).
So, don't use this oiling system any more or better change the oil pipes leading to the top of the kingpins with grease nipples.
Happy Morganing!
D'herde Bart

Grease nipples all the way, why would you want to lubricate something with a lubricant that is already used and dirty and not designed for the job. Plus your king pins will last longer.

I acquired my first Morgan, a 1971 4/4 4 Seater, in 1976 which I adored and rebuilt. It came with the one shot oil system but after I got through one set of king pins I decided to change to grease nipples. Worked a treat and my second set of king pins lasted until I sold the car in 1981 with over 80k miles on the clock. In short, fit grease nipples.

David

I have had both but I think the grease option is better.
However on my 4/4 which I bought with 25k on the clock & sold with 55k I didn't replace the bushes & it had the oiler which I used every 500 m.

Go Mog has a long debate on this on it's manitenance section.
http://www.gomog.com/allmorgan/front.htm

I'm driving my 1967 4/4 since new with the one shot system. One set of bushes lasts about 70 000 to 80 000 kms. My rims are often greasy but I never had oil on the brake discs (but I had more than once grease on the discs of my MG).

Bronze bushes are meant to be oiled, not greased wherever they are used. They are porous and the pores do fill with oil and work as "reservoirs". That's why proper engineers let them lie in warm oil for 12 hours before they fit them. - And that's why the rear bush of a dynamo (those were the days...) for example has to be oiled and nevertheless lasts for quite a long time if you forget to do so.

Morgans were (are?) not always fitted with classic bronze bushes, and for these greasing may be appropriate.

Frank (feeling his old age)

Good replies, thanks.

My car is an '83 4/4 that I have owned for 3 years and have always greased, but it occurred to me that the oiler system was used on the car for 60 years(?)...so if it was so bad and did not work..how come it remained in place for so long?

Young Frank gave a good engineers response, which perhaps answers the above comment. The Morgan front suspension mechanism is simple but clever engineering and the oiler system is a simple but clever lube solution.

Additionally, I only do a few thousand miles per year and my engine oil remains clean and viscous from one change to the next. Also, I do not want to be lulled into a false sense of security thinking that a couple of pumps of grease each month is doing a good enough job and getting into all the places needed. Because it is more solid than liquid, grease needs holding in place to ensure contact with the surface. The ideal would be a pressurised system that continually pumps grease through at low volume

I know majority opinion is 'grease only' but as you can probably tell, I'm not one for blindly following the crowd without question.

Maybe the answer is to do both??

Tonight David, I think Frank 'Bodger' wins the debate...but which way to vote??

May I add my 2 bob's worth?
I have just completed a "front end conversion" from the oil system ( kept getting oil on my disk brake rotor) to the more logical greasing of the king pins system).
Regarding the oil lube pipes, I have squeezed the ends flat and tied them up out of the way.
I have screwed in a grease nipple to fill the hole in the new kingpin hole in the top.
I was advised by dealer NOT to grease this nipple.
It apparently fills and congeals grease outside the exit hole for the oiler system and just collects grit etc and serves no purpose to the lubrication of the king pin!
I now worry that if a malfunction on the oiling valve happened, would oil be pumped out of the engine, now that the exits of the pipes are not sealed (into top of kingpins?)
should I remove the pipe on the block and blank it of permanently ?
I want to leave the old archaic oiling system in place for authenticity only! now we would both be authentic
what are your views on these questions guys?
Peter

Does "block" mean the one shot valve on the firewall or the engine block? Removing the pipe from the engine would mean that you lose the function of the oil pressure gauge (if fitted). You could blank off the exits to the pipes that leave the one shot valve to the king pins by inserting a small washer without a hole (I don't know the correct name for such a thing in English) between valve and pipe. That would make it easy to return the system to "original" if you once should want to do so.

Frank

I would either buy some more connectors and blank off the pipes inder the wing or disconnect them on the valve & put blanking washers in the coupling & rebuild it minus the pipes.
John