Simon,
In "those them days" it was fairly common that cars in the Netherlands
were completely rotten within 3-5 years. Renault, Simca, Citroen, Mini,
BMC, DAF, Fiat, Opel, Autobianchi, Mercedes, BMW etc. Not to mention
later on a Jensen Healey. Only the VW Beetle stood out for lasting (a
bit) longer.
Bad construction because of mud traps and bad drainage, inferior metal,
salt on the road and absolutely no rust proofing apart from some under
seal which usually made things worse instead of better.
There were indeed quite a few factories in Ireland that assembled CKD
kits. In Ballincollig near Cork there was one for DKW and several Fiat,
VW, Renault, Chrysler/Talbot/Rootes, Ford, BMC, perhaps Opel? cars were
also assembled in IRL.
Same in many countries. In NL we had Ford, BMC, DKW, Opel amongst
others. In Belgium they had Opel/Vauxhall/Volga!!/DAF and some others.
Cheers,
Kees Oudesluijs
Op 23-10-2015 om 15:12 schreef Simon Lachlan:
> Kees,
> Frightening that your AH was totally rotten after 10 years or so.
> I had a MkII BT7 when I was a student, so that's approx 45 years ago. I
> can't remember exactly when I bought it; let's say 1970. So, it wasn't even
> 10 years old. That car was in worse condition then than my current MkII BT7
> is now and it is not a concours car. Not at all.
> Regarding the first car, some clown had stuck plywood over the dash to ape a
> BJ7 or 8 dash. I was at Trinity College Dublin. In those days, one had to
> pay a very considerable import duty on imported parts which I couldn't
> really afford. I do recall carrying(!!!) a hardtop over on the Liverpool
> ferry. The customs guys stopped me on arrival; I told them that the top was
> for a cut down Mini special that was originally locally made. (Quite a few
> cars were assembled (CKD?) in Ireland in those days. Including Minis. At
> Rathmines in Dublin of all places.) I got through; I doubt that they
> believed me, just they gave me credit for a good fib.
> The car was Colorado red over matt(!) black. The top was some after-market
> purplish crimson. A complete dog's breakfast.
> Enough,
> Simon
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Healeys [mailto:healeys-bounces@autox.team.net] On Behalf Of Oudesluys
> Sent: Friday, October 23, 2015 13:23
> To: Bob Haskell; healeys@autox.team.net
> Subject: Re: [Healeys] Suspension bushings - tangent
>
> Bob,
>
> Many more or less performance cars and a fair amount of FWD cars have a
> stabiliser bar/tie rod or even a proper shock absorber to limit and/or damp
> torsional movement/vibration (Mini, Jensen Healey). Most of the time though
> this torsional movement is adequately dealt with by engine mountings that
> are spaced sufficiently wide apart.
> The gearbox mountings will only help if the rubber blocks on the extensions
> are spaced wide enough.
> I cannot remember if that is the case on the AH's. To long ago (1965/6) that
> I owned one for a very short time. I think it was a 1954 or 1955 car bought
> for less than $100. Totally rotten.
>
> Cheers,
> Kees Oudesluijs
>
>
> Op 23-10-2015 om 13:09 schreef Bob Haskell:
>> Kees,
>>
>> As mentioned the tie rod limits the fore/aft motion of the
>> engine/gearbox assembly. The gearbox mounting also includes a bracket
>> with a rubber block on the left and right sides of the OD or gearbox
>> extension (torsional) and a rubber bumper on the bottom side for the
>> downward motion.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Bob Haskell
>> AHCA 3000 Mk I registrar
>> http://www.ciahc.org/registry_3000mk1.php
>>
>> On 10/23/2015 06:32 AM, Oudesluys wrote:
>>> I did not realise that the tie rod was orientated front/rear. In that
>>> case you are absolutely right.
>>> These rods are more usually used to prevent torsional movement of the
>>> engine to keep clutch judder (amongst others) in control. I those
>>> cases I would go for rubber bushes.
>>> Kees Oudesluijs
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Op 23-10-2015 om 4:27 schreef WILLIAM B LAWRENCE:
>>>> I think I disagree. The main purpose of the tie rod is to keep the
>>>> engine from shifting forward and damaging the radiator. It has very
>>>> little function as a shock absorber. Its orientation to the engine
>>>> center line means there is little vibration in that direction. On
>>>> the other hand the rubber bushings fail very quickly on exposure to
>>>> oil and water. if the bushings fail and allow the engine to move
>>>> forward under braking it can do some substantial damage. I think
>>>> Austin probably would have used a more durable material in that
>>>> place if one had been available (and economic). My car is not
>>>> concours and never will be so my emphasis is going to be on
>>>> durability. I'm definitely going to urethane for this application.
>>>>
>>>> Bill Lawrence
>>>>
>>>>> To: healeys@autox.team.net
>>>>> From: coudesluijs@chello.nl
>>>>> Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2015 12:14:23 +0200
>>>>> Subject: Re: [Healeys] Suspension bushings - tangent
>>>>>
>>>>> I do not think so as this also has to work as a vibration damper
>>>>> and rubber is better in that respect than PU. Perhaps you can fit
>>>>> a
>>>> sleeve
>>>>> around it to protect it from oil.
>>>>> Kees Oudesluijs
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Op 22-10-2015 om 12:04 schreef Bob Haskell:
>>>>>> Larry and Michael,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Would you use urethane bushings for the engine tie rod
>>>>>> (lower/rear gearbox/OD mount)? Urethane doesn't deteriorate like
>>>>>> rubber when
>>>> oil
>>>>>> soaked. But it doesn't absorb as much shock loading either.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Bob Haskell
>>>>>> AHCA 3000 Mk I registrar
>>>>>> http://www.ciahc.org/registry_3000mk1.php
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 10/22/2015 04:04 AM, Larry Varley wrote:
>>>>>>> Absolutely agree with Michael here, from past experience I
>>>>>>> would completely avoid urethane for any car to replace original
>>>>>>> rubber
>>>> bushes.
>>>>>>> Its a pity that the correct rubber bushes are not made, but I
>>>> would
>>>>>>> still use the reproductions rather than urethane. From an
>>>> engineering
>>>>>>> standpoint urethane has a totally different way of operating to
>>>> what the
>>>>>>> car was originally designed for, stretching rubber fixed
>>>>>>> against
>>>> steel
>>>>>>> surfaces is not the same as rotating urethane on a pin. Has
>>>> anyone ever
>>>>>>> asked any of the urethane bush manufacturers if their products
>>>>>>> are approved by current auto manufacturers, or if they will
>>>>>>> accept
>>>> liability
>>>>>>> for any damage they will cause? I would prefer to stay with a
>>>> product
>>>>>>> that is as close as possible to the original specification. In
>>>> closing,
>>>>>>> enlighten me, do any current auto manufacturers use urethane as
>>>> their
>>>>>>> standard suspension bush?
>>>>>>> Cheers
>>>>>>> Larry Varley
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 22/10/2015 7:08 AM, Michael Salter wrote:
>>>>>>>> Bob,
>>>>>>>> I suspect that I'm not telling you anything that you don't
>>>> already
>>>>>>>> know here BUT:
>>>>>>>> I think the critical point is that the original suspension
>>>> bushes work
>>>>>>>> in the same way that rubber engine mounts are designed to
>>>> work. The
>>>>>>>> steel mounting plates (or in the case of mounts steel tubes)
>>>>>>>> are rigidly attached to parts that move relative to each other
>>>>>>>> and
>>>> that
>>>>>>>> movement is accommodated by the flexing of the rubber medium
>>>> bonded to
>>>>>>>> each plate.
>>>>>>>> The plastic bushes work more like bearings in that the
>>>>>>>> rotational movement is accommodated by rotation of the bolt
>>>>>>>> (shaft)
>>>> within the
>>>>>>>> bush (bearing). All very well while you are flying straight
>>>>>>>> and
>>>> level.
>>>>>>>> The problem, as I see it, is that when angular displacement is
>>>>>>>> required, as in body roll, the plastic bushes must distort and
>>>> as the
>>>>>>>> plastic is by necessity relatively rigid, when compared to the
>>>>>>>> original rubber, the loads imparted to the mounting points
>>>> will be
>>>>>>>> substantially higher than that for which they were designed.
>>>>>>>> Maybe you will get away with it, maybe you won't., I just
>>>> don't want
>>>>>>>> to be passing you in the opposite direction if you don't!!!!
>>>>>>>> Michael S
>>>>>>>> BN1 #174 (All rubber bushes :-))
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> Support Team.Net http://www.team.net/donate.html Suggested
>>>>>>> annual donation $12.75
>>>>>>> Archive: http://www.team.net/archive
>>>>>>> Forums: http://www.team.net/forums
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Healeys@autox.team.net
>>>>>>> http://autox.team.net/mailman/listinfo/healeys
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Unsubscribe/Manage:
>>>>>>>
>>>> http://autox.team.net/mailman/options/healeys/rchaskell@earthlink.ne
>>>> t
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Support Team.Net http://www.team.net/donate.html Suggested
>>>>>> annual donation $12.75
>>>>>> Archive: http://www.team.net/archive
>>>>>> Forums: http://www.team.net/forums
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Healeys@autox.team.net
>>>>>> http://autox.team.net/mailman/listinfo/healeys
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Unsubscribe/Manage:
>>>>>> http://autox.team.net/mailman/options/healeys/coudesluijs@chello
>>>>>> .nl
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -----
>>>>>> Geen virus gevonden in dit bericht.
>>>>>> Gecontroleerd door AVG - www.avg.com
>>>>>> Versie: 2015.0.6172 / Virusdatabase: 4450/10869 - datum van
>>>> uitgifte:
>>>>>> 10/22/15
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Support Team.Net http://www.team.net/donate.html Suggested annual
>>>>> donation $12.75
>>>>> Archive: http://www.team.net/archive
>>>>> Forums: http://www.team.net/forums
>>>>>
>>>>> Healeys@autox.team.net
>>>>> http://autox.team.net/mailman/listinfo/healeys
>>>>>
>>>>> Unsubscribe/Manage:
>>>> http://autox.team.net/mailman/options/healeys/ynotink@msn.com
>>>> Geen virus gevonden in dit bericht.
>>>> Gecontroleerd door AVG - www.avg.com <http://www.avg.com>
>>>> Versie: 2015.0.6172 / Virusdatabase: 4450/10871 - datum van uitgifte:
>>>> 10/22/15
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Support Team.Net http://www.team.net/donate.html Suggested annual
>>> donation $12.75
>>> Archive: http://www.team.net/archive
>>> Forums: http://www.team.net/forums
>>>
>>> Healeys@autox.team.net
>>> http://autox.team.net/mailman/listinfo/healeys
>>>
>>> Unsubscribe/Manage:
>>> http://autox.team.net/mailman/options/healeys/rchaskell@earthlink.net
>>>
>>
>> -----
>> Geen virus gevonden in dit bericht.
>> Gecontroleerd door AVG - www.avg.com
>> Versie: 2015.0.6173 / Virusdatabase: 4450/10873 - datum van uitgifte:
>> 10/22/15
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Support Team.Net http://www.team.net/donate.html Suggested annual donation
> $12.75
> Archive: http://www.team.net/archive
> Forums: http://www.team.net/forums
>
> Healeys@autox.team.net
> http://autox.team.net/mailman/listinfo/healeys
>
> Unsubscribe/Manage:
> http://autox.team.net/mailman/options/healeys/simon.lachlan@homecall.co.uk
>
>
>
> -----
> Geen virus gevonden in dit bericht.
> Gecontroleerd door AVG - www.avg.com
> Versie: 2015.0.6173 / Virusdatabase: 4450/10873 - datum van uitgifte: 10/22/15
>
>
_______________________________________________
Archive: http://www.team.net/archive
Healeys@autox.team.net
http://autox.team.net/mailman/listinfo/healeys
|