triumphs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: spit 1500 rear wheel chamber<332D45BC.3F38@member.dalton.net>

To: Spitfire 1500 <spitfire1500@named.dalton.net>
Subject: Re: spit 1500 rear wheel chamber<332D45BC.3F38@member.dalton.net>
From: RICHARD.JACKSON@NENE.AC.UK
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 1997 13:30:41 +0000 (GMT)
Cc: Jonathan Miles <MILESJE@novell2.bham.ac.uk>, mgx@icesar.epm.ornl.gov, triumphs@Autox.Team.Net
References: <256406958EC@novell2.bham.ac.uk>
>If the driveshafts were TOO short, there would be an EXCESS of NEGATIVE
>camber.  There would be negative camber because the trunnions are below
>the axleshaft, hence the pivot point is below and a shorter axle will
>pull the wheels inward towards the top.

>A DPO may have fitted an OLDER swing spring setup from a pre 1500.  This
>would result in a one inch decrease per side in track.  Then another
>owner, not necesarily a DPO, found those axles to be bad, so replaced
>with axles for a 1500.  Hence, the longer axles of the 1500 would push
>the tops of the wheels out, since the pivot point is below the
>axleshaft, creating positive camber.   It's a long shot, but entirely
>possible, considering the age of our LBCs.

>Hope this may shed some light!

OR, this is gettin' long!!! maybe some jerk has fitted a fixed spring!

just another thought.

Rich

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
  • Re: spit 1500 rear wheel chamber<332D45BC.3F38@member.dalton.net>, RICHARD.JACKSON <=