REAR SHOCK MOUNTS??

Post by **bigginger** » Mon Apr 07, 2008 7:49 pm

Aha - sorry, I have sig pics blocked on this browser, as I got fed up with waiting for them all to load once

I just couldn't make out quite what you were asking/suggesting, but I'm very thick.

Post by **bmcecosse** » Mon Apr 07, 2008 7:54 pm

I agree - the 'beam' across the floor is not much use since the floor is thin and flimsy - hence early on I said something about 'if it's not cracked' - it could be braced up to the rear seat diaphragm in some way, but of course there's nothing like that in the Traveller! Lower mounts on the spring are many times stronger than the upper mount arrangement - certainly not the weak point in this arrangement. But i agree they would need to be stronger for coil-spring damper units. I just find it hard to believe anyone would design a system with dampers canted over at such an angle !

Post by **jonathon** » Mon Apr 07, 2008 8:26 pm

From conversations with its designer BM, 'its a cheap and cheerful kit'. That comment alone would raise the alarm bells. I believe as Robins says this mounting arrangement is also used as a basis for the 'coil over kit'. Fortunately this kit still relies on the leaf springs as springs and the coil overs are very low sprung so in effect offer little in support 'glorified dampers' are what they are. Fortunately well designed kits are available from other specialists, but they demand more financial commitment than most Minor owners will want to afford. But in my book 'you get what you pay for 'in this market, so buyer beware.

Post by **PAULJ** » Tue Apr 08, 2008 9:26 pm

OK all, it seems that neither of the two alternatives I have are very good. The donor car has the channel under the seat with the shocks at an angle. My restored body shell has the long mounted on the inner wing. What do people recommend as a rear damper upgrade?

Post by **Willie** » Wed Apr 09, 2008 7:55 pm

As someone whos angled rear tele kit snapped the cross beam in half
(the Owen Burton kit) after little use I would suggest you study the JLH
version. This uses properly designed turrets which enable sufficient overall movement of the dampers. If you do not use turrets then you cannot possibly fit long enough telescopics to allow for all possible
deflections.

Post by **bmcecosse** » Wed Apr 09, 2008 8:35 pm

Maybe short dumpy dampers would be ok Willie ? some kits simply use the original damper mounting 'pin' on the rear chassis leg for the top mount - with a plate mount under the rear spring pan. Damper is slightly angled rearwards - but not too much. Is there any advantage over the lever arms - I doubt it! There is nothing intrinsically wrong with lever dampers - they can be 'tuned' by filling with more (or less) viscous oil - and the oil changed when it becomes 'torn', which is something you can't do with most tele dampers.

Post by **Willie** » Thu Apr 10, 2008 8:58 am

BMC,no, short teles just do not allow for the requisite amount of movement even if they are angled instead of upright. This results in
extra strain on the mounts which is why Owen Burton kits break the top
mounting crossbar eventually. The amount of movement available on the original dampers is incredible but this means that you never hear of a broken mount.

Post by **Peetee** » Thu Apr 10, 2008 10:21 am

Maybe short dumpy dampers would be ok Willie ? some kits simply use the original damper mounting 'pin' on the rear chassis leg for the top mount - with a plate mount under the rear spring pan. Damper is slightly angled rearwards - but not too much

This is the system that I have just fitted to Albert. When he gets on the road and I clock up some miles I will report on it's effectiveness. Having driven a totally standard car and one with thicker oil in standard dampers I should be reasonably qualified to make a comparison.

As for the effectiveness of angled shocks, There are many commercial vehicles out there with them and they cope with a far wider range of loadings than a car and they seem to cope OK. Perhaps it just needs some proper research as to the most effective damper for a Minor as I suspect from what I have read elswhere that certain kits use dampers from another car that were 'about right' for the application and, more likely, readily available.

Post by **jonathon** » Thu Apr 10, 2008 10:39 am

Peetee wrote:-

Perhaps it just needs some proper research as to the most effective damper for a Minor as I suspect from what I have read elswhere that certain kits use dampers from another car that were 'about right' for the application and, more likely, readily available.

Some specialists have done this for you, and supply fit for purpose,tested and specific systems for you to fit to your cars.
Unfortunately the 'scrapyard 'mentality that suspension components can be swapped from unrelated cars to the Minor, ie weight of donor car ,attitude of dampers, damper rate ,stroke etc are seen as irrelevant so long as it can be bodged onto the car.
I realise that money is an issue for many owners, but why pass up the research and development that we carry out to supply a safe proven product ,just to save a few quid, this approach is probably okay if you are qualified to make valued engineering decisions,on critical areas such as brakes an suspension, but I despair really and wonder if we professional modifiers are just wasting our time on an audience ,some of whom wish to ignore the efforts made on their behalf.

Post by **Stig** » Thu Apr 10, 2008 1:41 pm

Absolutely, it must be frustrating when people discuss home-made mods when someone like yourself knows what works because you've put the time effort and expertise into it. Unfortunately there are a lot of owners who fix/restore their own cars so are keen to have a go modifying them too. Improvements like alternators, heaters etc. are one thing but suspension mods aren't simply "bolt on". (or rather they shouldn't be, so let's not talk about the rear damper kit that's on my car

)

Post by **Peetee** » Thu Apr 10, 2008 2:13 pm

Some specialists have done this for you, and supply fit for purpose,tested and specific systems for you to fit to your cars.

I agree with everything you say Johnathon. The kit I have I bought 'new' from a chap on the Brighton run many years ago. I'm not certain of it's origin, I suspected at the time it was CS Autclassics, but it does appear to be well made (unlike some other kits I have bought in ignorance in the past) and importantly didn't have the dreaded crossmember so I was happy it wasn't a product from 'HIM'. So I'll give it a try.

Post by **PAULJ** » Thu Apr 10, 2008 8:35 pm

has anyone got photos of the JLH mod, I've just checked the price and O my its expensive

Post by **jonathon** » Thu Apr 10, 2008 8:48 pm

Well Paul the total cost of the bolt on kit would buy only 1and 1/8 of our dampers. So questions as to quality need to be asked.

Post by **callyspoy** » Thu Apr 10, 2008 8:57 pm

hi pete, i also have the same kit as you ready to fit to impy, i also bought some spax dampers(they were cheap okay jonathon!!) so hopefully they will be okay...but we will see...if anyone wants a pic, i can add one on here i think...

Post by **jonathon** » Thu Apr 10, 2008 9:16 pm

Not having a go callyspoy or meaning to be derogatory to others

just meaning to say that you cannot compare like for like in this regard. We do not play the game of being cheapest, just good quality at a fair price.

Post by **callyspoy** » Thu Apr 10, 2008 9:19 pm

haha! i was only joking, i've said before, if i could...i definitely would!

Post by **jonathon** » Thu Apr 10, 2008 9:22 pm

hey, what alloys are they in your sig pic , MGF ?

Post by **callyspoy** » Thu Apr 10, 2008 9:50 pm

yes indeed they are, 16"...tyres are silly low profile though, so i'm getting higher profile ones put on very soon...just bought some different 15" ones for the front though...cant wait to chuck those on...

Post by **jonathon** » Thu Apr 10, 2008 11:01 pm

Looking good ,what section tyres are on at the moment ?

Post by **callyspoy** » Sun Apr 13, 2008 2:38 am

sorry...i'll plead ignorance to this...what is section?

is that the "width"...ie-"they have 215's on them"...if so...they have 215's on them!!