Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*79\s+spitfire\,\s+height\s+problem\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*79\s+spitfire\,\s+height\s+problem\s*$/: 8 ]

Total 8 documents matching your query.

1. 79 spitfire, height problem (score: 1): Author: "Bradley D. Richardson" <brichard@us.oracle.com>; Date: Fri, 23 Jul 1999 14:08:24 -0700; I have a 1979 spitfire, in remarkable shape. However, we have noticed that it doesn't sit level. It has new shocks, and a new rear spring. The tires and wheels are the same size. The passenger side o; /html/spitfires/1999-07/msg00760.html (7,572 bytes)
2. Re: 79 spitfire, height problem (score: 1): Author: Andrew Mace <amace@unix2.nysed.gov>; Date: Fri, 23 Jul 1999 14:39:30 -0400 (); First, let's hope the new rear spring indeed was new and was correctly made. (Worn rear springs are the usual cause of this in later Spitfires.) It might be worn mounting bushes in the differential.; /html/spitfires/1999-07/msg00761.html (8,455 bytes)
3. RE: 79 spitfire, height problem (score: 1): Author: "Michael Burdick" <burdick@abacus.mc.duke.edu>; Date: Fri, 23 Jul 1999 17:07:39 -0400; This was the first thing that came to mind for me, but that's probably because I had a '76 Spitfire that came to me with one early and one late axle... Mike Burdick Durham NC '70 Spit; /html/spitfires/1999-07/msg00764.html (7,424 bytes)
4. Re: 79 spitfire, height problem (score: 1): Author: "John Reynolds" <jfreynolds@briefcase.com>; Date: Fri, 23 Jul 1999 14:44:10 -0800; I had the same problem with my 79.After replacing all of the springs, trunnions, bushings et al., the problem still remained. After about a month in the chassis shop I still had the same problem. Fi; /html/spitfires/1999-07/msg00766.html (8,833 bytes)
5. Re: 79 spitfire, height problem (score: 1): Author: mrobertson@celcorp.com; Date: Fri, 23 Jul 1999 16:18:58 -0600; I don't know if this is 100% accurate, but I believe Triumph added spacers between the spring towers and the springs on some cars to compensate for stocks of short springs they recieved from some su; /html/spitfires/1999-07/msg00767.html (8,374 bytes)
6. Re: 79 spitfire, height problem (score: 1): Author: Bob Sykes <stan.part@worldnet.att.net>; Date: Sat, 24 Jul 1999 14:58:22 -0700; Yet another tuppence added to the pot of good suggestions so far: I recently learned that the front anti-roll bar will also cause this problem. After years of "driver only" loading, the anti-roll bar; /html/spitfires/1999-07/msg00788.html (7,618 bytes)
7. Re: 79 spitfire, height problem (score: 1): Author: "James Carpenter" <james.carpenter@jccsystems.swinternet.co.uk>; Date: Sat, 24 Jul 1999 14:39:19 +0100; At the front you might look at your anti role bar. These bend with use where there is more force on one side. Partly driver weight, partly people tend to go round corners faster if they driver is tak; /html/spitfires/1999-07/msg00796.html (9,042 bytes)
8. Re: 79 spitfire, height problem (score: 1): Author: "Wayne Burton" <Wayne_burton@bc.sympatico.ca>; Date: Wed, 28 Jul 1999 22:43:46 -0700; Have you had the rear toe-in (alignment) checked? I've found that after many years of work and abuse, the shims have either gone missing, or the metal where the radius arm bolts to the body have str; /html/spitfires/1999-07/msg00957.html (8,230 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 8
Page: [1]