> Lewis,
> The "thump" you're hearing and feeling is probably the suspension
> bottoming out on the bump stop. The May/June 97 issue of the Octagon
> discusses ride heights and how shortened bump stops must be used for the
> suspension to work. I can fax you a copy of the article if you don't
> have it.
>
> Question to the listers. Shouldn't you use a shorter spring to lower
> the car rather than a different rate? Is a #480 stiffer or softer than a
> standard spring? I'm guessing it is softer if it lowers the car but
> doesn't that defeat the purpose of the lowering? Maybe a shorter,
> stiffer spring?
>
> Craig Brallier
>
> 75 MGB
> 76 MGB
Craig, Thanks for the tip. I've been there, done that. I didn't
replace
the whole bumpstop assy. but I did buy generic rubber 'bullet bumpers'
and trimed them to be shorter than the stock ones.
A #480 rate spring is the stock rate for the RB B's according to the
lit. that I have. I have a set of #550 rate springs and I tried those, but
they are just plain too short to work with the RB crossmember geometry.
The bottom A arms when viewed from the front of the car were slanted
WAY up on the outside. Mongo negative camber.
Question... would the lowered springs affect the rack tie rods any?
IOW... with the lowered springs, the tie rods slant 'up' more than they
did with the stock springs. Know what I'm saying? Would this stress
part of the rack & pinion unit? I'll sure feels like the 'thump' is there
but
not sure...
Thanks,
Bill Lewis
'77B
|