RB and CB springs could well adopt the same free height and certainly have
the eyes the same distance apart, and the same leaf width and thickness.
The difference is in the load rating or 'springiness'. RB roadsters
initially had the same springs as RB GT's i.e. the extra 'leaf' but reverted
to 5 leaf plus bottom plate in Sep 75. The only true proof of the pudding
is in the actual ride height, and tales of 'too high' North American springs
are legion.
----- Original Message -----
From: <CraigFaubel@aol.com>
To: <mgb-v8@autox.team.net>
Sent: Sunday, January 06, 2002 1:10 AM
Subject: CBB -v- RBB rear springs
> I've wondered about this one for a while: I bought new rear springs for
my
> RBB conversion project car long ago, and when I removed the old ones, I
held
> the new one right up alongside and noticed no differences in arch or eye
> placement, so I took the old set to the scrapyard. The new set has one
> additional 'leaf' (really a short length of leaf at the bottom), and I
wonder
> if I may have unintentionally gotten a set of RBB springs, and now my car
> will set too high. My question is - can you tell the difference between
the
> two sets visually, or is the ride height set by spring rate so that both
> appear the same until load is applied??
///
/// mgb-v8@autox.team.net mailing list
/// Send admin requests to majordomo@autox.team.net
/// Send list postings to mgb-v8@autox.team.net
/// Edit your replies! If they include this trailer, they will NOT be sent.
///
|