triumphs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Mk3 spitfire suspension upgrade

To: Andrew Mace <amace@unix2.nysed.gov>
Subject: Re: Mk3 spitfire suspension upgrade
From: Peter Lucas <pllj@earthlink.net>
Date: Wed, 26 Nov 1997 19:38:12 -0700
Cc: Jonathan Miles <MILESJE@novell2.bham.ac.uk>, timm01@cs.soaks.kent.sch.uk, triumphs@Autox.Team.Net
References: <Pine.SOL.3.91.971126153601.29039D-100000@unix2.nysed.gov>
Andrew, 

        The later half shafts are longer by a 1/2" EACH! Together they equal
1". When swaping to a swing spring setup, (the spring is 1" longer than
that of earlier models), you need to also replace the half shafts to
make up this 1" difference. Otherwise you'll be driving on your
sidewalls and that wont add to better handeling.

PL '64 Spitfire (with swing spring mod)

Andrew Mace wrote:
> 
> On Wed, 26 Nov 1997, Peter Lucas wrote:
> 
> >       First-          you need a later model spring.
> >       Second-         (2) new half shafts. The later model Spits are a total
> >                               of 1" wider.
> 
> Note that the later axles (1" longer each; total increase in track 2")
> are NOT necessary. Nice, but not necessary.
> 
> >       Third-          Are you going to press those things yourself?
> >                               (Look up old thread $$$)
> 
> What do you need to press, unless you're looking into a complete rebuild
> of each rear axle assembly? It's usually easier to buy complete, longer
> units (if that's the route you wish to go) and install them complete.
> 
> >       Fourth-         You will most likely run into clearance problems.
> >                               The spring sits a little lower and the axles 
>stand
> >                               a little wider. Result-tires hit fenders.
> 
> See above comments.
> 
> > If your willing to go through all that work, than you should replace
> > your shocks, diff mounts, bushings and u-joints as well. This ='s $$$
> > It is, however, the route I took on my '64 restoration and I didn't
> > notice much of a difference in handeling. A bit less roll but I think
> > that an anti roll bar would have given about the same increase in
> > performance.
> 
> I think that the benefits of the later swing-spring suspension (which
> really must be paired with the fatter front anti-roll bar) come mostly "at
> the limit"; the swing-spring greatly lessens the tendency of the rear
> wheels to "jack" under the car. In more "normal" driving, I wouldn't
> expect to notice much of a difference between suspension types.
> Meanwhile, it's probably good to replace all those items you mentioned
> regardless. There's always a good chance that you'll have been the first
> ever to do this!
> 
> > If I had to do it over again, I would have replaced the
> > shocks with a set of Konis, replaced the mounts, installed urathane
> > bushings, new u-joints and an Addco 5/8" anti roll bar. Good tires can
> > also make a big difference. Oh yea- If you need to replace your leaf
> > spring, I would suggest TRF over Vic Brit. Good luck!
> 
> The "classic" option is to simply dearch the original spring somewhat.
> Relatively cheap, and makes quite a difference. Upgraded shocks (Koni or
> Spax) also are worthwhile if you're serious about driving. And, there's
> always those elusive camber compensators! ;-)
> 
> --Andy
> 
> * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
> * Andrew Mace, President and                *
> *   10/Herald/Vitesse (Sports 6) Consultant *
> * Vintage Triumph Register                  *
> * amace@unix2.nysed.gov                     *
> * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

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