From the what I can see in your pic it 'looks' OK, but it's not the same as having it on the bench in front of you.
Harley wrote:
I'd take it apart and it back together without the oil pickup, selector forks, etc and see how that is. If its the same, remove the second layshaft and see how things feel then.
I was thinking something similar, only leave the baulk rings out and nipping up the first & third motion shaft nuts, just the seat the bearings 100%.
But, before you strip it down again, while in 1st or 2nd and you spin it over, have a look at the 'ears' of the baulk rings in 3rd and 4th, you'll see them in the synchro hub, one of these may be picking up. You should easily be able to move them with a small screw driver,
freely.
When (as I guess you will have to) strip it down again, you'll be removing the laygear before the 1st & 3rd motion shafts. At this point make sure the 1st and 3rd motion shafts spin freely of each other and test that all other gears (1st, 2nd & 3rd) also spin freely. There should be no binding what so ever.
Asphalt wrote:
Did you use new 'genuine Rover' baulk rings...?
So basically you can't spin gears & mainshaft in opposite direction ('reverse')? I had this symptom when I first used 4 genuine Rover baulk rings. With 4 good used ones it all span free like it should. On the latest gearbox I've used a Rover ring on 2nd gear, and 3 MiniSpares rings on 1st,3rd & 4th. Which worked too. On my own gearboxes I use good 2nd hand rings (3rd & 4th are not that worn in most cases anyway).
However, I wasn't able to figure out what the problem is/was with those baulk rings... They'r not too big. I suspect the inner shape could be wrong and the new ring can't travell far enough on the cone and 'binds' the gears/synchro hubs. That's all theory of course and I could be wrong. However, there was definately a problem with 4 Rover rings. And I'm open to suggestions of what the problem might be

Cheers,
Jan
The Baulk Rings Guessworks supply are non-genuine.