FAQ Search Usergroups Register Profile Log in to check your private messages Log in

Rodsmith · Posted: Wed Oct 08, 2008 2:55 pm Post subject:

Sorry I can't help Dave, I can't get too close the car at the moment. However, my bottom wishbones drop about 25* from the horizontal, I would say. I am unable to lower the spring collar on the AVOs as you have done because it is too close to the stub axle nut, or so it seems, I haven't actually tried it, but I feel the front is too high. I think if you put the arms into final position you may see what I mean. The height from the ground to the belly pan is approx 6 and 1/2 ", so about 7" to the actual x-member. The car is not on smooth ground to give accurate measurements.

I have never seen a front subframe, in the flesh, so your photos will help when I make a start. They look pretty complicated!

Rod

Paul Narramore · Posted: Wed Oct 08, 2008 4:33 pm Post subject:

The diameter of the PhII anti-roll bar is 1/2" and as it's spring steel, my guess is that it was provided by Rochdale Motor Panels' local spring manufacturer. With it's flattened ends, it doesn't look like one from a production car (but I may be wrong). Very Happy

Rodsmith · Posted: Thu Oct 09, 2008 9:39 am Post subject:

This is the normal position of wishbone

Position of bottom collar

There is 2" between the top of the shocker body and the bump stop

Note extreme castor angle?

Dave-M · Posted: Thu Oct 09, 2008 12:00 pm Post subject:

Rod, Those springs look so wrong it hurts me to look at them. I bet the ride is rock hard.
Regards
Dave
_________________
Ph.2 Ford 1500 GT
GT with Rochdale Chassis

Rodsmith · Posted: Thu Oct 09, 2008 1:05 pm Post subject:

Dave, they are the Club AVOs and springs all round, and yes the ride is very hard. However, as I have never been in an Olympic, apart from this one, I have nothing to compare it with!

Rod
_________________
" Stay lucky "

Dave-M · Posted: Thu Oct 09, 2008 1:43 pm Post subject:

Rod, The reason your spring adjuster and stub axle nut appear to be on a collision course is because the spring and adjuster are approximatley 25mm greater in diameter than the 2 & 1/4" one shown in my pictures.
In theory there should be clearance, I guess the only way is to try it.
Regards
Dave
_________________
Ph.2 Ford 1500 GT
GT with Rochdale Chassis

Rodsmith · Posted: Thu Oct 09, 2008 2:42 pm Post subject:

You may be right, obviously as the suspension moves so does the angle between the upright and the damper. Are your dampers narrower than mine if you can get 2 and 1/4 springs on? I haven't measured the spring id of mine.

I have just done a very unscientific test by pushing down on each corner of the car. There is a fair amount of movement on the rear, 3 to 4 inches downwards perhaps and 2 inches if I lift the corner. Difficult to measure on your own! The front has less movement 2 to 3 inches downwards and is stiffer than the rear.

However, the Olympic has more suspension movement and is softer sprung than my MGB. I appreciate that the MGB weighs more, but it is on standard, old springs.

The ride in the Olympic is harsh, especially at the front, sometimes it feels that it bottoms out.

Rod
_________________
" Stay lucky "

Paul Narramore · Posted: Thu Oct 09, 2008 6:11 pm Post subject:

I've always felt the Olympics were too damned firm. The public wouldn't tolerate this in a mass produced car. The springs look almost coil bound too and far too great in section for such a light car. Mind you I've had the luxury of owning numerous Citroens over the years. Now they DO know a thing or two about supple suspensions.

I've always felt that the way to go (Colin Chapman) was softer springs and increased damping.

Rodsmith · Posted: Thu Oct 09, 2008 7:06 pm Post subject:

You may well be right Paul, I think that I can get movement on my suspension is, possibly, because the dampers are adjusted very soft. The dampers themselves may be OK, just the springing may be wrong?I agree, it looks as if my springs may become coil bound over rough ground, the front certainly crashes and bangs!

Has anyone sorted it out and got a nice riding car, or not, do you know?
Rod
_________________
" Stay lucky "

Paul Narramore · Posted: Thu Oct 09, 2008 10:43 pm Post subject:

Rod

For years this subject has been discussed in the club magazine, and my guess is that most cars are as they left the factory. It needs someone with a roadgoing Olympic to experiment with softer springs and firmer damping (I feel). In the 50s and 60s, that's how sportscars were, rock hard springing and soft damping. Colin Chapman changed that with the Elite and Elan and the Olympic needs to follow suit I think.

Paul Narramore · Posted: Sat Oct 11, 2008 9:41 pm Post subject:

(OK, I'll move over here, Dave)

A few years ago, I removed the front subframe of my Ph2 to both check on the corrosion and to have a good look at it. When Richard designed it, he built on anti-dive. I remember writing about this in the club magazine at the time but it's a while since I have looked at both the article and the subframe.

What he did was to have the upper and lower threaded rods (to which the wishbones bolt on to) converging front to back. To me this just didn't seem right in that the upper and lower wishbones moved in different planes rather than being parallel. I have since altered my subframe so that the threaded rods are parallel.

Dave, As for you making top hat extensions to the tops of the subframes, good on you. I don't understand what you mean't when you remarked that you "didn't care what anyone else thought about it". To me it seems a logical mod to make to get the suspension unit to actually work. Quite why this (restricted movement) has passed unnoticed after all this while, I really don't know.

Rodsmith · Posted: Sat Oct 11, 2008 9:57 pm Post subject:

Paul- A few questions if I may-

Has it been detrimental to remove the anti-dive?

What damper/spring combination have you got fitted?

Did you design your own subframe?

Does your car drive "nicely" with your set up?

It seems that Dave's idea could be beneficial to those with Club AVOs and I should like to give it a go.
_________________
" Stay lucky "

Paul Narramore · Posted: Sat Oct 11, 2008 10:18 pm Post subject:

Err Rod, I thought I'd inferred that my car is not roadworthy, in fact it is totally dismantled as shown in the pics recently on here of my new workshop. No I just gave the matter a lot of thought a felt they just HAD to be parallel. The existing threaded rods were in poor condition so I got new ones made up, drilled and filed the old subframe and fitted the new rods.

I had the subframe sandblasted and patched up in places. One day it'll be galvanised then refitted to the car.

In fact I was looking at the standard Woodhead suspension units only today. Whilst the springs could be reused if necessary, the dampers are extremely rusty and I've only kept them for reference purposes.

Yes, as I said, anything to make the AVOs actually work must be good for the car, it just puzzled me why nobody has mentioned this problem before. Maybe very few owners have actually fitted them? Maybe drivers just tolerate them? Unless the silent majority speak up - just where IS everybody - then we won't know.

Rodsmith · Posted: Sat Oct 11, 2008 10:58 pm Post subject:

Sorry Paul- As a newcomer it is only too easy to forget who is who and what state their various cars are in, indeed how many cars each person has!

I suppose that there is a feeling that, if the Club supplies the suspension units then, they must be right. I have never driven another Olympic and assumed that the ride must be hard, as all of my suspension, front and rear, has been fully replaced, and updated, by the previous owner. I am so busy at the moment to start rebuilding my suspension, but I am starting to gather the info ready!

Rod
_________________
" Stay lucky "

Paul Narramore · Posted: Sun Oct 12, 2008 6:39 am Post subject:

http://i190.photobucket.com/albums/z312/Paul_Narramore/Building%20of%20the%20garage/T.jpg

This is the current state of my Ph2, 90 FHO. At least for the first time since I bought it from Alaric Spendlove all those years ago, she's in the warm and dry at last. All of the windows, doors, the hatch, suspension, etc, are stored in a shed at the bottom of the garden.

As for the spares sold by the club being 'right', the club is a small band of enthusiasts, many of the armchair kind me being one of them, and a tiny handful actually either having cars on the road or at least have embarked on the long and tortuous journey to get theirs back on the road. I'm certain that the club spares are as good as they can be but it's only with the enthusiasm of a tiny number that this sort of discrepancy can be ironed out. In the past we've had the infamous stainless steel tanks which reduced the fuel capacity by a country mile and had fillers at odds with the petrol caps, and stainless steel suspension springs. I contacted the manufacturers at one time to enquire quite why chrome vanadium (the best material and specified in the 1960s by RMP) wasn't specified by the club and they expressed their surprise at the then Chairman's insistence on SS. So you see it was often but not always one person who ordered these spares but club members who 'tested them out'. I'm not saying that that is the case now but we are a tiny club in comparison to say the MG Owners Club where they have tens of thouisands of members and even a club shop with full-time employees. We are still very much on our own when restoring these cars but with the assistance of both the Club and other club members in a similar situation. That's why we should talk more either here on in the club magazine.

At present just five or so out of a total membership of about 110 are doing that here Sad

.