> -----Original Message-----
> GlacierMy 1980 Spitfire has always leaned on the driver side and over
> the
> years I have become used to it....
Joe Curry replied:
> The story is that Triumph in their infinite wisdom chose to install that
> Swing-Spring to correct the Wheel tuck problem instead of Kas Kastner's
> Camber compensator. In order for it to work, the spring is much softer
> than the early springs and therefore, the driver's weight tends to make
> the spring collapse after a while. Replacing the spring will solve the
> problem but in a while it will be back....
My admittedly unscientific observation over the years has been that the dreaded
"sag" from swing-springs generally does NOT occur in the MkIV Spitfires or even
those early (1973) "Federal" Spitfire 1500s with the wider rear track. It seems
to be a problem primarily with 1975 and later "Federal" Spitfires with not only
the rear chassis extensions but also the ever-heavier bumpers on the rear.
(1974 "Federal" Spitfire 1500s had the extensions, but the added-on rubber
overriders didn't seem to add that much more weight.)
How about you with, say, UK-spec later Spitfire 1500s, without all the added
bumper/chassis weight in the rear? Do these cars generally exhibit the same
"sag" over time? My theory is that the swing-spring wasn't quite heavy-duty
enough to survive long-term with all the extra weight.
Alternatively, anyone with a later "Federal" Spitfire that has been "lightened"
by removal of the extra bumper weight? Do you still see the "sag" over time?
--Andy Mace
|