Last winter there was a lengthy thread discussing the use of anti-roll
bars (ARBs) with solid axle Triumphs. Here is a summary and conclusions
drawn from the discussion, as well as a quote which seems to resolve the
one item on which there was significant disagreement:
1. All respondants agreed that a front ARB improves the handling of solid
axle TRs, diminishing understeer and yielding tighter, flatter and more
precise turns. Many endorsed a three quarter inch bar for the front.
2. All respondents agreed that if a rear bar is employed as well as a
front, the front bar should be of greater diameter (stiffer) than the rear.
3. The best deal for ARBs seems to be Addco bars purchased from J. C.
Whitney.
4. There was strong disagreement over whether or not a rear ARB should be
employed. Some reported good success with both bars and others were so
unsatisfied that they removed the rear bar. The complaint was that the
rear bar caused oversteer, one corrspondent warning that cars so equipped
could become uncontrollable on wet roads.
A quote from, "How to Make Your Car Handle" by Fred Puhn (HP Books),
suggests that both opinions are correct depending on the particular
handling desired:
"If you install an anti-roll bar on the rear, or if you stiffen an
existing one, the effect is to create oversteer. This is *not* a desirable
modification unless the car understeers very heavily under all conditions.
One reason for making this modification, however, would be if you wanted to
race the car in slaloms. Ultra-tight cornering requires the car to
oversteer to help it around the turns. "
I bought an Addco front ARB, P/N 127U, from J. C. Whitney for my '60
TR-3A and will not use one on the rear. The front bar costs $100 with
eurothane bushings and $95 with rubber, plus $18 for shipping.
John Cowan
Pass this review along to a friend. To subscribe, send email to:
jfcowan@earthlink.net . Check out previous reviews at:
http://home.earthlink.net/~jfcowan
|