View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
calex_fr Registered User
Joined: 18 Jul 2008 Posts: 408 Location: Champagne (France)
|
Posted: Fri Oct 10, 2008 7:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Dave-M wrote: |
alex, I don't fully understand the drawings but the problem looks to be similar.
Dave |
My english is too bad to understand all, but I think he explains the problem in his blog http://crazyspitfire.blogspot.com/2007_11_01_archive.html _________________ Alexandre Contat
from France |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Dave-M Registered User
Joined: 20 Jan 2006 Posts: 377 Location: Yorkshire, England
|
Posted: Fri Oct 10, 2008 8:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Alex, no disrespect to the guy, but it seems to be a money spending exercise, 500 lb/in springs? on a spitfire! stupid.
Dave _________________ Ph.2 Ford 1500 GT
GT with Rochdale Chassis |
|
Back to top |
|
|
calex_fr Registered User
Joined: 18 Jul 2008 Posts: 408 Location: Champagne (France)
|
Posted: Fri Oct 10, 2008 8:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
yes i know, and today him car isn't realy interseting, too much modifications.
But when I saw the draw, I think immediatly to our poblem. _________________ Alexandre Contat
from France |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Paul Narramore Registered User
Joined: 13 Mar 2006 Posts: 181 Location: Aylesford, Kent.
|
Posted: Sat Oct 11, 2008 9:02 am Post subject: |
|
|
Dave
1. I mentioned the Herald/Spitfire suspension not that it should be copied but that it worked very well for tens of thousands of production cars. Nor am I saying that the spring rates should be copied, just that something might be learned from the dimensions of the suspension set up as this was clearly the starting point before Richard Parker made his alterations to enable it to fit the Olympic.
2. The American Spitfire blogspot. Again it's irrelevent that he chooses to fit 500 lb springs. That's not the point of Alexandre adding the drawings and blog link to this thread. I'm sure it's to show that others also have modified their Herald/Spitfire suspension in a similar manner to what you are planning to do. Not with S/S top hats but with a pair of beefy brackets. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
calex_fr Registered User
Joined: 18 Jul 2008 Posts: 408 Location: Champagne (France)
|
Posted: Sat Oct 11, 2008 10:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
Paul Narramore wrote: |
2. The American Spitfire blogspot. Again it's irrelevent that he chooses to fit 500 lb springs. That's not the point of Alexandre adding the drawings and blog link to this thread. I'm sure it's to show that others also have modified their Herald/Spitfire suspension in a similar manner to what you are planning to do. Not with S/S top hats but with a pair of beefy brackets. |
yes you understand, interesting for me was the suspension shape (draw) in this blog. _________________ Alexandre Contat
from France |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Dave-M Registered User
Joined: 20 Jan 2006 Posts: 377 Location: Yorkshire, England
|
Posted: Sat Oct 11, 2008 6:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Alex/Paul sorry for appearing to disregard your posts, it was not my intention and I apologise.
Perhaps if I reply in more detail now it will make amends.
Alex, Yes the changes to the spitfire are to fix the same problem that we have but as far as I am concerned I do not want to fit a rose joint to the top of my shocker I want to use the rubber or poly mounts. I think the rose joint would be too high maintenance for everyday use (like my wife).
Paul, I think the herald suspension is very close to ours
and we can probably gain useful info from it. But I don't have detailed info regarding it and would prefer to work out what I think I need by measuring what I have in front of me and not making assumptions based on what is used on another car.
Perhaps if we want to discuss this, it may be better under the front suspension topic.
I don't really mind what anyone thinks of the top hat/rubber bush solution or the beefy bracket/rose joint solution, i am just sharing information of my project with other Rochdale owners.
Regards
Dave.... muttering.... I must improve my interpersonal skills on the internet. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
calex_fr Registered User
Joined: 18 Jul 2008 Posts: 408 Location: Champagne (France)
|
Posted: Sun Oct 12, 2008 7:00 am Post subject: |
|
|
No problem, I was not upset, I just feared for not having explained.
And I totally agree with you, I'm looking for a simpler solution. _________________ Alexandre Contat
from France |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Dave-M Registered User
Joined: 20 Jan 2006 Posts: 377 Location: Yorkshire, England
|
Posted: Sun Oct 12, 2008 11:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
Oh dear, more problems with the AVO's.
Here is a picture of the bottom arms showing where the trunnion and shocker fit.
They are held to the bottom arm by a bolts passing through tubular spacers on which both the trunnion and shocker can rotate.
When bolted up the other end of the wishbones hould be like this.
They are not they are like this
continued..... |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Rodsmith Registered User
Joined: 16 Jun 2008 Posts: 187 Location: Pembrokeshire, West Wales
|
Posted: Sun Oct 12, 2008 11:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
Dave, can this be sorted out by grinding the sides of the shockabsorber eye to reduce its width, or by putting spacers each side of the trunnion?
Rod _________________ " Stay lucky " |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Dave-M Registered User
Joined: 20 Jan 2006 Posts: 377 Location: Yorkshire, England
|
Posted: Sun Oct 12, 2008 11:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
The inner ends are too far apart and the centre line of the bush eyes is misaligned
Why?? AVO's again. The trunnion is this wide.
And the AVO bush is this wide
The error in width on the AVO causes the error at the inner end of the wishbones.
This will wreck the wishbone bushes and cause serious stress in the lower arms.
The fix is easy, just press out the steel crush tube and reduce it' length to 1.5" (the width of the trunnion and top ball joint housing) and all should be well on reassembly.
Regards
Dave
Last edited by Dave-M on Sun Oct 12, 2008 12:03 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Dave-M Registered User
Joined: 20 Jan 2006 Posts: 377 Location: Yorkshire, England
|
Posted: Sun Oct 12, 2008 12:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Blimey Rod you were quick!!
Dave _________________ Ph.2 Ford 1500 GT
GT with Rochdale Chassis |
|
Back to top |
|
|
calex_fr Registered User
Joined: 18 Jul 2008 Posts: 408 Location: Champagne (France)
|
Posted: Mon Oct 13, 2008 8:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
I am desapointed and that make me ask questions :
- Are we sure that our olympics wishbones are Herald/spitfire wishbone ?
- if no, can you compare with original Triumph wishbones ?
- if yes, perhaps this AVO aren't good for Triumph, and could we try with Spax or Gas Triumph for ? _________________ Alexandre Contat
from France |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Paul Narramore Registered User
Joined: 13 Mar 2006 Posts: 181 Location: Aylesford, Kent.
|
Posted: Mon Oct 13, 2008 8:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
"- Are we sure that our olympics wishbones are Herald/spitfire wishbone ? "
Yes they are.
"- if yes, perhaps this AVO aren't good for Triumph, and could we try with Spax or Gas Triumph for?"
Quite, that's Dave's point. The AVOs seem to be dimensionally not quite right for the suspension. This is why he's going to so much trouble to make sure they fit properly. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
calex_fr Registered User
Joined: 18 Jul 2008 Posts: 408 Location: Champagne (France)
|
Posted: Wed Oct 15, 2008 9:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
Rochdale Avo :
Triumph Avo :
_________________ Alexandre Contat
from France |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Dave-M Registered User
Joined: 20 Jan 2006 Posts: 377 Location: Yorkshire, England
|
Posted: Wed Oct 15, 2008 10:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
Alex, If that Triumph shocker is fully extended it has less travel that our AVO's.
I think it's time to have a word with AVO about this. I am sure they can make "correct" shockers for us and the top hat solution can be used for all the existing "incorrect" dampers.
Regards
Dave |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|