I recently started re-reading Graham Robeson's book "Triumph Spitfire
& GT6". Right there in chapter 1, page 19, he says "Cost targets for
the new car, which had been named Herald after Alick Dick's own boat,
were very tight, and this partly explains why the very versatile
independent front suspension was matched by a very cheap and nasty
swing-axle independent rear suspension. Harry Webster has since
stated that his engineers always wanted to use the pivoting-spring
type of swing axle layout which was not adopted on the Spitfire until
the start up of MkIV production, but that cost limits killed it off
for many years. Besides, he insists, the suspension was perfectly
adequate for its original purpose, which did not include the
development of a sports car from the basic layout."
The first and third sentences are obvious, but the second sentence
makes several interesting points. One is that they must have come up
with the idea long before planning the MkIV upgrade. Another point
is that, at least as far as the Herald was concerned, the swing-
spring was not just a cheap expedient. Cheaper perhaps than either
the GT6's Rotoflex version or a camber compensator, but apparently
significantly more expensive than the original swing-axle.
Those folks were pretty good engineers.
--
Jim Muller
jimmuller@rcn.com
'80 Spitfire, '70 GT6+
=== This list supported in part by The Vintage Triumph Register
=== http://www.vtr.org
|