Subject: Re: [Healeys] Moss Motors adjustable camber bushing set

From: "John Sims" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2012 15:18:13 -0500

Did anyone call Moss about this to speak with their technical people?

John Sims, BN6
Aberdeen, NJ

www.healey6.com

-----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]]
On Behalf Of [email-masked]
Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2012 2:44 PM
To: [email-masked]
Subject: [Healeys] Moss Motors adjustable camber bushing set

Recently I helped a friend install a set of Moss Motors adjustable camber
bushings in his '63 BJ7. He wanted to reduce the amount of positive camber.
After reading the Moss instruction sheet several times, it appears that
their illustrations at the bottom of page 1 are backwards.
http://www.mossmotors.com/graphics/products/instructions/282-308.pdf
The position of the fulcrum pin never changes, it's position is controlled
by the upper "A" arms attached to the shock. Therefore, if the bushing is
orientated as shown in the left illustration, the trunion & top of the
kingpin will be moved farther away from the engine which would be more
positive camber not less camber. Am I correct or am I missing something?
Gary Hodson
_______________________________________________
_______________________________________________
Archive: http://www.team.net/archive

[email-masked]
http://autox.team.net/mailman/listinfo/healeys

---

From: john spaur <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2012 12:52:25 -0800

I believe their instructions are correct.

The camber adjuster moves the top of the kingpin however, the kingpin 
rotation point is at the lower wishbone. When the top of the kingpin 
is moved towards the engine it rotates the bottom of the tire outward 
and/or the top of the tire towards the engine. This straightens the 
tire inclination thus reducing the camber.

John Spaur
San Jose, CA

At 02:43 PM 12/4/2012 -0500, [email-masked] wrote:
>After reading the Moss instruction sheet several times, it appears that their
>illustrations at the bottom of page 1 are backwards.
>The position of the fulcrum pin never changes, it's position is controlled by
>the upper "A" arms attached to the shock. Therefore, if the bushing is
>orientated as shown in the left illustration, the trunion & top of the kingpin
>will be moved farther away from the engine which would be more positive camber
>not less camber. Am I correct or am I missing something?
>Gary Hodson
>Support Team.Net http://www.team.net/donate.html
>Suggested annual donation  $12.75
>Forums: http://www.team.net/forums
>
>[email-masked]
>Unsubscribe/Manage: 
>http://autox.team.net/mailman/options/healeys/[email-masked]

[email-masked]

---

From: [email-masked]
Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2012 16:10:01 -0500 (EST)

I emailed them & am waiting for a reply.
Gary Hodson

-----Original Message-----
From: John Sims <[email-masked]>
To: warthodson <[email-masked]>; healeys <[email-masked]>
Sent: Tue, Dec 4, 2012 2:18 pm
Subject: RE: [Healeys] Moss Motors adjustable camber bushing set

John Sims, BN6
Aberdeen, NJ

[email-masked]

---

From: [email-masked]
Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2012 16:20:45 -0500 (EST)

John,
That would be correct, if as you say the top of the king pin were moved
towards the engine, but that is not what happens when the bushing is oriented
as shown in the left diagram. In the left diagram the king pin is moved away
from the engine. Remember, the location of the trunion pin remains fixed,
regardless of the bushing orientation.
Gary

-----Original Message-----
From: john spaur <[email-masked]>
To: warthodson <[email-masked]>
Cc: healeys <[email-masked]>
Sent: Tue, Dec 4, 2012 2:52 pm
Subject: Re: [Healeys] Moss Motors adjustable camber bushing set

John Spaur
San Jose, CA

[email-masked]

---

From: john spaur <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2012 13:28:25 -0800

[email-masked]

---

From: [email-masked]
Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2012 21:36:00 -0500 (EST)

Either too much toe in &/or too much positive camber. Also tire pressure low
could contribute to this.
Gary Hodson

-----Original Message-----
From: Tom Felts <[email-masked]>
To: jmsdarch <[email-masked]>; warthodson <[email-masked]>
Cc: healeys <[email-masked]>
Sent: Tue, Dec 4, 2012 6:02 pm
Subject: Re: [Healeys] Moss Motors adjustable camber bushing set

Alone the "camber" discussion line, can anyone tell me --
1.  Why my front tires are wearing slightly on the outside edges?  65 BJ8

2.  How to remedy this?

thanks
tom

[email-masked]

---

From: HealeyRick <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2012 18:47:16 -0800 (PST)

Stop trying for FTD in the autocross  ;>).  That's the quickest way to wear
the outside edges.  Are both the front and rear tires wearing on the edges or
just the fronts?  

Rick

"Madman in a death machine"
Follow My Nasty Boy
Build:  http://tinyurl.com/yj52fwo

________________________________
 From:
Tom Felts <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked];
[email-masked] 
Cc: [email-masked] 
Sent: Tuesday, December 4,
2012 7:02 PM
Subject: Re: [Healeys] Moss Motors adjustable camber bushing set
Alone the "camber" discussion line, can anyone tell me --
1.  Why my front
tires are wearing slightly on the outside edges?  65 BJ8

2.  How to remedy
this?

thanks
tom

[email-masked]

---

From: George Haywood <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2012 21:51:14 -0500

Gary, If you look at the orientation of the king pin to the upper fulcrum pin
and bushes you'll note that the fulcrum pin is outboard of the king pin
therefore with the hole in the bush toward the engine the king pin will be
positioned toward the engine thus giving less camber.  It took me a while to
figure it out also.  If the fulcrum pin were oriented in line vertically with
the king pin then what you are saying would be correct.  However that is an
impossibility in design so the fulcrum pin has to be either outboard or
inboard of the king pin.  Hope this helps. Take care, George Haywood'65 bj8
> From: [email-masked]
> Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2012 14:43:44 -0500
>  it appears that their illustrations at the bottom of page 1 are backwards.

[email-masked]

---

From: "Tracy Drummond" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2012 04:52:22 -0800

Gary,

You are correct.  Also consider that too much toe in might produce similar
wear.  The offset upper bushing will bring it to 0 or slight negative
camber.  Mine was slight positive now it is slight negative with the
bushings.

-----Original Message-----
Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2012 11:44 AM

$12.75

[email-masked]

http://autox.team.net/mailman/options/healeys/[email-masked]
_______________________________________________
Archive: http://www.team.net/archive

[email-masked]

---

From: "Tracy Drummond" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2012 05:00:26 -0800

Yup  I think the crux of the issue is qualifying camber with positive or
negative.

Regardless we want slight negative camber  / --- \ with bushings like  (  o)
--- (o  )

No Marion those are not boobies those are bushings.

-----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]]
On Behalf Of john spaur
Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2012 12:52 PM
To: [email-masked]
Cc: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [Healeys] Moss Motors adjustable camber bushing set

The camber adjuster moves the top of the kingpin however, the kingpin
rotation point is at the lower wishbone. When the top of the kingpin is
moved towards the engine it rotates the bottom of the tire outward and/or
the top of the tire towards the engine. This straightens the tire
inclination thus reducing the camber.

John Spaur
San Jose, CA

At 02:43 PM 12/4/2012 -0500, [email-masked] wrote:
>Recently I helped a friend install a set of Moss Motors adjustable 
>camber bushings in his '63 BJ7. He wanted to reduce the amount of positive
camber.
>The position of the fulcrum pin never changes, it's position is 
>controlled by the upper "A" arms attached to the shock. Therefore, if 
>the bushing is orientated as shown in the left illustration, the 
>trunion & top of the kingpin will be moved farther away from the engine 
>which would be more positive camber not less camber. Am I correct or am I
missing something?
>Support Team.Net http://www.team.net/donate.html Suggested annual 
>donation  $12.75
$12.75

[email-masked]

[email-masked]

---

From: "Tracy Drummond" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2012 05:06:23 -0800

Bob I had that same reaction,  stop turning   hehehehehehehe   

I also pointed out that excessive toe in also will cause scrub even if we
never turn.

-----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]]
On Behalf Of Bob Spidell
Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2012 4:15 PM
To: Tom Felts
Cc: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [Healeys] Moss Motors adjustable camber bushing set

Pretty normal IMO. No matter what camber setting you have, when you corner
you'll have some body roll and the moments of inertia will shift to the
outside of the turn. This causes the tire to roll towards the inside of the
turn, and to put more weight and hence more wear on the outer part of the
tire. The rear tires wear more on the outside, too, but not as much as the
front. 

More modern/better suspensions do a better job of keeping the tire/wheel
orthogonal to the road through the suspension arc, but tires on most cars
will generally wear more on the outside. 

Remedy: never turn. 

Bob 

--------------------------------
Bob Spidell - San Jose, CA 

----- Original Message -----

Alone the "camber" discussion line, can anyone tell me -- 1. Why my front
tires are wearing slightly on the outside edges? 65 BJ8 

2. How to remedy this? 

thanks
tom

[email-masked]

[email-masked]

---

From: [email-masked]
Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2012 09:05:43 -0500 (EST)

Chris,
I understand your explanation concerning shortening the shock arm length, but
that is not the effect when the bush is installed with the hole "closer to the
engine". The hole is never closer to or farther away from the engine. The
hole, regardless of where it is orientated, is always the same distance from
the engine because it is located by the fulcrum pin which is in a fixed
location determined by the shock arms. When the bushing is orientated as shown
in Moss Motors left illustration, it is the fulcrum & therefore the top of the
king pin which is located farther away (not closer) to the engine resulting in
more positive camber, not less camber.
Gary Hodson

-----Original Message-----
From: Chris Dimmock [Healey] <[email-masked]>
To: warthodson <[email-masked]>
Sent: Wed, Dec 5, 2012 12:19 am
Subject: Re: [Healeys] Moss Motors adjustable camber bushing set

Gary
The diagram is correct.
Think of the bushing as either shortening or lenthening the shock arm.
A shorter shock arm reduces camber. A longer shock arm increases it.
e.g. if you had 1 degree positive camber, and shortened the shock arm, you
would end up with less than one degree positive camber.
i.e. if the hole is closer to the engine you are shortening the distance (in
compriion to a standard bush) and reducing positive camber.
_______________________________________________
Archive: http://www.team.net/archive

[email-masked]

---

From: [email-masked]
Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2012 09:14:43 -0500 (EST)

George,
I do not see how having the king pin inside or outside of the fulcrum pin has
anything to do with it.
The hole is never closer to or farther away from the engine. The hole,
regardless of where it is orientated, is always the same distance from the
engine because it is located by the fulcrum pin which is in a fixed location
determined by the shock arms. When the bushing is orientated as shown in Moss
Motors left illustration (towards the engine, but not closer to the engine),
it is the fulcrum & therefore the top of the king pin which is located farther
away (not closer) to the engine resulting in more positive camber, not less
camber.
Gary Hodson

-----Original Message-----
From: George Haywood <[email-masked]>
To: warthodson <[email-masked]>; healeys <[email-masked]>
Sent: Tue, Dec 4, 2012 8:51 pm
Subject: RE: [Healeys] Moss Motors adjustable camber bushing set

Gary,

If you look at the orientation of the king pin to the upper fulcrum pin and
bushes you'll note that the fulcrum pin is outboard of the king pin therefore
with the hole in the bush toward the engine the king pin will be positioned
toward the engine thus giving less camber.  It took me a while to figure it
out also.  If the fulcrum pin were oriented in line vertically with the king
pin then what you are saying would be correct.  However that is an
impossibility in design so the fulcrum pin has to be either outboard or
inboard of the king pin.  Hope this helps.

Take care,

George Haywood
'65 bj8

[email-masked]

---

From: George Haywood <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2012 09:53:41 -0500

Gary,

Look at these photos and maybe you can see where I'm coming from in my
description of what I think happens when an offset hole in the  trunion
bushings (fulcrum bushes) will cause the effect of having the king pin either
towards the engine or away depending on where the hole is located.  The angle
of rotation is around the fulcrum pin on the lower wishbone but the upper
fulcrum pin will maintain the position of the upper portion of the king pin in
relation to the lower fulcrum pin and causing a change in camber with negative
camber being created when the offset hole in the bushing is toward the engine.
That is unless I'm missing something here.  On some british cars the trunion
is oriented 180deg. out from a 3000 which would give you the camber relation
that you describe.   Sometimes things aren't as simple as I see them though
since I'm just a simple shade tree Healey enthusiast.

George Haywood
'65 bj8

George,

Gary,
 If you look at the orientation of the king pin to the upper fulcrum pin and
bushes you'll note that the fulcrum pin is outboard of the king pin therefore
with the hole in the bush toward the engine the king pin will be positioned
toward the engine thus giving less camber. It took me a while to figure it out
also. If the fulcrum pin were oriented in line vertically with the king pin
then what you are saying would be correct. However that is an impossibility in
design so the fulcrum pin has to be either outboard or inboard of the king
pin. Hope this helps.
 Take care,
 George Haywood

[demime 1.01d removed an attachment of type image/jpeg]

[demime 1.01d removed an attachment of type image/jpeg]
_______________________________________________
Archive: http://www.team.net/archive

[email-masked]

---

From: "\" Just Brits \" Shop" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2012 01:59:54 -0600

<< On 12/4/2012 6:02 PM, Tom Felts wrote:

1.  Why my front tires are wearing slightly on the outside edges?  65 BJ8 >>
  
Too much toe-IN, Tom.  Get*Her*  on a FLAT paved surface & via Steering Wheel make
sure tyres/wheels are "straight ahead".  Go out 15' -  20' (more if needed) and get down on yer belly and "sight" the tyres,  It might show up plain as the nose on yer face or it may not.  If not, instead at looking at front wheels alone, "sight" LF wheel with LR wheel & make mental note/image [if possible - LOL],  Roll over and "sight" LF tyre with LR.  What shows ??

Generally ONE (1) side will show up as 'turned in' a bit.
Guessing*She*  has Radial Tyres, could be between 1/2" & 3/4" combined.

<< 2.  How to remedy this? >>

Yep;  RTFM & Re-set tie-rod end(s) ! !    Oh WAIT, trying to be 
'nicer' <G> ! !
NAH, LOL ! ! !

At this point get car up in air BUT supported on F & R suspensions.  I 
use a set of four (4) wood blocks that I made up which are 6" x 6" w/ 
F & R 'chocks'.  Make SURE you get/have front wheels straight ahead.& 
un-do tie-rod end locking nut(s).

Again guessing *Her* steering wheel is correct, I adopt the NASCAR 
"string alignment tool/method".

AGAIN, RTFM <G> !   You can even set to 'Zero' degrees in/out as out 
cars were designed for a number which gets wiped out by the radial 
tyres we use/have today.

Ed
Please visit MY site at:
www.justbrits.com

PS:  Tom, if you have re-pro Bias Plies, USE the true numbers.
PPS:  In the future, plz do NOT "hi-jack" a Subject Thread as your 
Question AND my
Reply will NOT show up on a search of the Archives <F> BECAUSE OF the 
'change'!
_______________________________________________
Archive: http://www.team.net/archive

[email-masked]

---

From: Jonas Payne <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2012 07:56:01 -0800

Don't forget the primary reason for the camber position on our LBC's - it
makes it very easy to turn unassisted steering while parking and driving at
low speeds - it also aids on return to center.

Unless you are autocrossing this thing or doing some serious roadwork - stay
with the original setup.  The tire wear issue is supposed to be addressed
through regular rotation 

Jonas Payne
PBR Consulting
702-882-6711

-----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]]
On Behalf Of Tracy Drummond
Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2012 4:52 AM
To: [email-masked]; [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [Healeys] Moss Motors adjustable camber bushing set

Gary,

-----Original Message-----

[email-masked]

[email-masked]

http://autox.team.net/mailman/options/healeys/[email-masked]
_______________________________________________
Archive: http://www.team.net/archive

[email-masked]

---

From: George Haywood <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2012 11:01:32 -0500

Gary,

After looking at my pictures and the Moss directions several more times  I
agree with your idea that the Moss diagram may be in error for a big Healey.
If the bush hole was toward the engine then it effectively pulls the trunion
away from the engine inducing positive camber I mistakenly was thinking that
the bushes were in the shock arms instead of the trunion--Brain Fart.  Sorry
for any confusion that may have been caused by this shade tree mechanic.  I
would probably have seen it during the application however.

Take care,

George Haywood
'65 bj8

> Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2012 09:14:43 -0500
>
> George,
> I do not see how having the king pin inside or outside of the fulcrum
> pin has anything to do with it.
> regardless of where it is orientated, is always the same distance from
> location determined by the shock arms. When the bushing is orientated
> as shown in Moss Motors left illustration (towards the engine, but not
> closer to the engine), it is the fulcrum & therefore the top of the
> king pin which is located farther away (not closer) to the engine
> resulting in more positive camber, not less camber.
> Gary Hodson
> If you look at the orientation of the king pin to the upper fulcrum pin
> therefore with the hole in the bush toward the engine the king pin will
> be positioned toward the engine thus giving less camber. It took me a
> while to figure it out also. If the fulcrum pin were oriented in line
> vertically with the king pin then what you are saying would be
> correct. However that is an impossibility in design so the fulcrum pin
> has to be either outboard or inboard of the king pin. Hope this helps.
>
> Take care,
>
> George Haywood

[email-masked]

---

From: [email-masked]
Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2012 11:50:44 -0500 (EST)

George,
Thanks for the reply. The left front suspension photo was very helpful & I was
just about to reply to you when I received your message below.We are on the
same page.
Gary

-----Original Message-----
From: George Haywood <[email-masked]>
To: warthodson <[email-masked]>; healeys <[email-masked]>
Sent: Wed, Dec 5, 2012 10:01 am
Subject: RE: [Healeys] Moss Motors adjustable camber bushing set

Gary,

After looking at my pictures and the Moss directions several more times  I
agree
with your idea that the Moss diagram may be in error for a big Healey. If the
bush hole was toward the engine then it effectively pulls the trunion away
from
the engine inducing positive camber I mistakenly was thinking that the bushes
were in the shock arms instead of the trunion--Brain Fart.  Sorry for any
confusion that may have been caused by this shade tree mechanic.  I would
probably have seen it during the application however.

Take care,

George Haywood
'65 bj8

[email-masked]

---

From: richard mayor <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2012 02:20:44 +0000

Jonas,

I think you have confused camber with caster. It is caster that makes the
steering want to return to center.

The main reason for having zero camber is to put tire perpendicular to the
pavement i.e., a better contact patch with the pavement.  In the early days of
motoring, tires were narrow and round in section like bicycle tires and
positive camber worked well with the steering and chassis designs of the time.
Today's tires, and more particularly performance tires, are wider and flat on
the bottom. When inclined or leaned over, they do not continue to make a flat
contact patch on the pavement surface so any positive camber is a no-no.

On my race car I run 1-3/4 degrees of negative camber.  I run zero degrees of
camber on my street Healeys.

Richard Mayor

 > From: [email-masked]
> To: [email-masked]; [email-masked]; [email-masked]
> Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2012 07:56:01 -0800

[email-masked]

---

From: richard mayor <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2012 01:57:38 +0000

Correction.   I run 2.75 degrees negative camber on my race car - not 1.75
degrees negative camber as stated in my last post.

Richard Mayor

[email-masked]