Thanks!
That's going in the bin then

I managed to make my gearbox mount into a useable part again.
If it becomes a problem part I will swap it out.
I used sikaflex to firm up and fill the voids.
Two M6 countersunk screws hold together what was once only vulcanised.

Like this....

'Solidifying' the mount can lead to more engine vibes transmitted into car.

Maybe, but I think it is more restored to original stiffness rather than solidified.
A saggy mount is no good either.
If it doesn’t perform it will be swapped out soon!

I'm happy with mine filled in. I've also infilled the voids on the engine front support. I was previously getting a vibe transferred to the cabin at 3k rpm. If anything it was slightly better after infilling the bushes. Also interesting, there was no difference in the vibe when I changed from a slightly knackered 143 engine to a much tighter 160 engine so there must be something happening at 3k.

How are your clutch pedal and gear linkage mods coming along Zagato?

The clutch pedal and gearbox bracket are the next jobs,
but tomorrow I will fit the gearbox and axles to give me a sense of achievement

Oh dear, I should have kept my mouth shut
It would appear the crankshaft in my engine isn't compatible with the PG1.......
The manual flywheel bolted up perfectly but I forgot the spigot bearing.
I will need a manual 1.6 engine or swap the whole lot for a 1.8.
Bum.

Won't fit to this.....

Panic over and the PG1 is in
The PG1 doesn't have or need a spigot bearing.
I was reading on the Caterham forums and they have to add a spigot bearing to their crankshafts but the PG1 runs without.
Further research on Rimmer Bros website confirmed that there is no spigot bearing in the cranks as Rover intended.
I cut 6mm from the tip of the shaft and all fits perfectly.
Brackets next......

So the spline part is correct, but you just needed to get rid of the plain nub on the end which runs in a bearing on some cars?

Good result. I saw that thread on the caterhams too. I think their issue is that when they use the engine inline rather than transverse and mate to a Ford gearbox the input shaft is very long and needs a bit of support from the spigot bearing. When used transverse as intended by Rover the input shaft is very short so can be supported adequately by the bearing in the gearbox. I'm surprised the input shaft was long enough to need cutting back but there are several different versions of PG1 - do you know which gearbox code you have?

Yep exact!

Mine doesn't have that label, is the code cast into the casing somewhere?
It was sold as a 1.8 VVC from an MGF.
My engine on the other hand is pre MGF 1.6 and has a distributor cap.
I expect an automatic Rover 216 was used as a donor.

The label is just paper and disintegrates with time! Not sure if it is stamped or cast somewhere too.
The one I have in use is a C4BP from a MG TF160 but I also have a slightly shagged C4BP from a MGF 143 VVC and I also have a C6BP from a TF 1.6 in my shed. All three have the same length input shaft and the same size spigot end (not sure if it goes inside the crankshaft end). Splines are the same too so can all use the same clutch. I've not cut the end off them. The only physical difference on the outside is the gearchange bell crank with the TF bottom link facing forwards and the F one facing backwards, although interchangeable.

Did you check the clutch actuator arm turns freely? They are known to seize.