Radius arm

Post by **NZJLY** » Sat Apr 22, 2006 11:32 pm

Greetings. Wee Bluebell (‘52 MM) has failed her warrant on a few things, one of them being the rubber on the radius arm. I have a replacement arm from a series 2 which is about half an inch longer. My theory is that the damper will work just as well in a slightly lower position, but do I need to replace the other side, get another original length one, or just ignore it

.
I await your knowledgeable replies.

Post by **bmcecosse** » Sun Apr 23, 2006 6:40 pm

Minors don't have radius arms !! And parts (whatever part it is) from a series 2 should be exactly the same as your car! Can you give a better description of what has failed - or a picture - is it front or rear suspension ? Scratching head hard here - is it a damper link arm - the rod from the chassis to the rear damper arm ?? If so - it's just possible other arms are slightly different length - in which case - use it!!

Post by **Multiphonikks** » Sun Apr 23, 2006 7:08 pm

I think we're talking about the lower front suspension arm (though of course I may be wrong!)

BMC - NZ tests are known for being really REALLY strict. (Isn't it a six-month thing either?)

You may be better off heading over to the AUS forums for this one as there's going to be more NZ members who know the criteria

Post by **newagetraveller** » Sun Apr 23, 2006 7:41 pm

It sounds as if you need to replace the two rubbers on the arm rather than the arm itself.

Post by **NZJLY** » Sun Apr 23, 2006 9:47 pm

Yes it is the damper link arm, and we are taking it back down for a WOF recheck today, so will keep you posted.
The only way I could try to work it out was searching on Google, but I suspect there was an apprentice involved in the checking, and so the descriptions are a bit odd

I was going to ask on the NZ forum, but iut seems to have dissappeared for a while, so hopefully Richard will have it back soon.
Thank you for your help 
John

Post by **bmcecosse** » Mon Apr 24, 2006 1:22 pm

Good luck with it ! The slight length variation will not matter - there is huge over-travel in the rear damper movement (both ways) any way, so slightly shorter link arm will be fine.

Post by **rayofleamington** » Mon Apr 24, 2006 1:35 pm

Doh! - I just cottoned on that this is the rear damper

A different length of damper arm on the front would be a very bad thing!

Post by **bmcecosse** » Mon Apr 24, 2006 7:29 pm

If slightly shorter would give handy negative camber!

Post by **Peetee** » Mon Apr 24, 2006 10:11 pm

I have seen early Escort track control arms which are adjustable. A section is cut out of the middle and each end is threaded to take a single rod with a clockwise thread at one end and a counter clockwise thread at the other. Turning this rod one way or the other lengthens or shortens the arm and adjusts the camber. In theory this could be done with the upper link arm on a Minor.

Post by **bmcecosse** » Tue Apr 25, 2006 1:29 pm

Would need to be very strong - because unusually for most cars it also twists the damper as it turns - so it's not just holding the king-pin assy in place - it's also transmitting the damper forces.
Mini bottom arms are available with screw adjustment - but they are one piece - where the Minor bottom arm is two piece - and again Issi used it to do two things - it twists the spring and holds the lower end of the king-pin assy in place !