triumphs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: TR6 Correct Ride Height

To: triumphs@autox.team.net
Subject: Re: TR6 Correct Ride Height
From: Daniel Julien <dgjulien@swbell.net>
Date: Thu, 21 Dec 2000 11:46:22 -0600
References: <OF7C3561E4.4B4E60C7-ON852569BB.0067988B@lotus.com> <a05001900b666d55a7f93@[209.177.158.7]>
User-agent: Mutt/1.2i pandachadwell@mac.com on Wed, Dec 20, 2000 at 01:58:49PM -0800
On Wed, Dec 20, 2000 at 01:58:49PM -0800, Pete & Aprille Chadwell wrote:
> 
> >Does anybody know the correct ride height for a 1971 TR6. I looked in both
> >Bentley & TR6 manual and could only find 6" ground clearance mentioned in
> >the specs. What is the "Ride Height" and how is it measured (from where to
> >where).

> just measured mine, from the concrete up to the bottom of that frame 
> rail right in the vicinity of the 'B' post and I got a measurement of 
> 6 3/8 inches. 

There has been an interesting range of variability in the measurements - all
the way from 3" to 6-3/8". This inspired me to go out and measure my car
(same point: frame under B post to concrete). It's a 1970 with (presumably)
stock springs, stock rubber bushings (replaced about 10 years ago), and
205/70-15 tires. I got 6-1/2" on the passenger side and 5-7/8" on the 
driver side. I haven't noticed any visible driver-side sag, but I suppose
the difference is due to tired original springs. No one else has mentioned
whether their measurements were the same on both sides - I assume they were.

So, are the springs the most likely culprit here? I already knew I had a
valve job coming up in the near future, and also had plans at some point of
replacing the bushings with polyurethane to eliminate the rear-end steer.
So I wonder if I should replace the springs while I have the rear end
disassembled, or could the new bushings alone take care of the sag?

-- 
Dan Julien
Austin, Texas
'70 TR6 CC50337L
dgjulien@swbell.net

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>