Hard to imagine anyone actually doing the comparison as you describe it,
without some kind of financial incentive. It would be a lot of work, and
if you decided the lever shocks were better, you'd be out the money for
the conversion and have to reinstall everything. The best you could
realistically hope for is a comparison of two different cars, similarly
equipped (besides the shocks), same size tires, and stock engines. But
that still might be a worthwhile experiment.
OK, I'm game. I have a stock engine '66 B with generic "no-name" tube
shocks and 175R-14s. Now all we need is an unmodified 62-67 roadster and
some track time...
Tim Economu had this to say:
>Thanks Harlan:
>Really appreciate the help. I have heard they are better too. But I am
>wondering if anyone has ever actually taken runs at the track to establish a
>baseline, using lever arm shocks in good condition, and then changed to tube
>shocks and made the same runs with those new shocks?? While subjective
>results are not to be discounted, I am just looking for some hard test data
>to back up the conversion efficacy.
>
>Looked up the subject in the archives, lot's of anecdotal stuff, but no
>facts. Maybe we are all just lemmings, eh?
>
>Tim
>'69 MGBGT
--
Max Heim
'66 MGB GHN3L76149
If you're near Mountain View, CA,
it's the red one with the silver bootlid.
|