tigers
[Top] [All Lists]

confounding ride height nonsense - hopefully solved

To: <tigers@autox.team.net>
Subject: confounding ride height nonsense - hopefully solved
From: "Tom Witt" <wittsend@jps.net>
Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2003 23:05:55 -0700
To clear up some confusion in the feedback I have been getting (and report my
latest results) this is what happened:

1. The stock Tiger springs had about a 1/2" free length difference. The
shorter of the two was on the driver's side. The front sheet metal had damage
enough to bend the front fenders at the center of the wheel opening. Someone
had put in one of those screw-in spring lifters on the driver's side. It may
have been to compensate for the shorter spring AND the fact that they had
215-60-13's up front AND and the needed lift for clearance of the bent sheet
metal.  Frankly it could have been any combination of those reasons.

2. The above is a mote point since I had purchased the CAT springs, replaced
the front clip and will likely run about 195-60-13's. The real problem was to
get the car to sit relatively level (side to side) with the slightest incline
to the front (about 1/2" measured from the back to the front). Since the Tiger
doesn't have a straight sill "level" is a difficult thing to define. It was
recommended to me that I use the side trim as it is "supposed" to be level. On
my car the stainless is missing, replaced by a tape pinstripe. Additionally it
disappears at the Tiger script because of the replacement clip. The best I
could do was draw a continuation of the pinstripe.

3. When I first installed the CAT springs there was a slight upward incline at
the front (about a 1/2") and I cut 3/8" off the coils (3/4" effect at the
wheels) to give what I thought would be about a 1/4" downward incline to the
front.

4. Instead what I noticed was that the driver's side had about 1-1/2" gap at
the bump stop and the passenger side had only 1/2" bumpstop gap. At the bump
stop that is a lot of difference (66 percent)!

5. Today's corrective action was to switch the CAT springs left to right. I
had tested the springs on the same side with rather different results
regardless that they were both 10-1/8" free standing. I had also originally
installed a thin, strong reinforced rubber ring (1/8" - about 1/16th"
compressed) on the bottom of each spring for quite operation. I took the ring
off the diver's side and used it as a second ring on the passenger side.

 The end results are that the car sits much more level. I measured the A-arm
to crossmember distance at two points. One at the bump stop and the other at
the outer slot for the sway bar to the crossmember section where the two halfs
join together.

Here are the results:

Installed without driver

             Bump stop              Swaybar mount slot to crossmember weld
section
Driver           7/8"                      3-1/2"
Pass.          3/4"                      3-3/16"

With driver (Well, 116 lb's wife - but at 42 I won't complaint that she could
have weighted more for the test!)

             Bump stop              Swaybar mount slot to crossmember weld
section
Driver          5/8"+                      3-1/4"
Pass.          3/4"                       3-1/4"-

The end results are that without a (light weight) driver the driver side is
slightly above the passenger side bump stop, and with the driver the bump stop
is slightly below the passenger bump stop. So, I guess that swapping springs
and adding the reinforced rubber shims on the passenger side pretty much
evened things out. I still think that the main problem is the compressed
difference with the CAT springs, and for some unseen reason the driver's side
seems slightly higher than the passenger side as it relates to the A-Arm and
the crossmember gap.
   Also, the downward front inclination (measure at the side trim) is between
5/8" and 3/4" which is minimal and right about what I was hoping for. All
measurements were done without shocks and the car weighted as FULL wet.
   I'm still baffled though that the gap at the bump stop is so small. Anyone
care to measure and give some feedback? It is somewhat hard to do because the
rubber bumper is convex and the the stop on thecrossmember is concave. I used
dividers for measuring internal dimentions.
Thanks to all who responded, it is great support to know that you don't go it
alone.

Regards, Tom Witt B9470101

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
  • confounding ride height nonsense - hopefully solved, Tom Witt <=