> 2 things that aren't 100% clear to me sorry,
>
> 1. *If the Rostyles rub on the inside arch, what 's the cure ?
If you still have clearance to the outer arch then spacers between hub and
wheel can centralise the wheel in the space available. But because it is
only the leaf springs that locate the axle the wheels do move from side to
side when cornering, so you could end up with a wide wheel/tyre combination
rubbing on *both* sides depending on which way you are cornering. There is
also the well-known offset of the axle to the LH side, so unless you use
different spacers you will not get both tyres centralised in their arches.
Opinions differ, but mine is that the axle and the spring mountings are
correct, it is the arches that differ right to left, so different spacers
would not be the correct thing to do or the car would be 'crabbing'
slightly.
> 2. AND, are the physical dimensions of a 1973 MBG Roadster/Salisbury
> axle housing the exact of a 1968 MGB GT Salisbury axle housing in width,
> wheel attachment location to wheel attachment location ??!
Yes, as long as both are wire-wheel or both are Rostyle (or more correctly
'disc' since the early disc wheel uses the same axle etc as the later
Rostyle).
> And of course I thought of something else, going by the Moss catalog
> MGB-0204, Issue 1 2002, effective 4/8/02 : page 115, it shows the
> "same axles" for both applications,
> but with item # 95, part # 267-720 and 267-730 hub
> extension L/R. wire wheel. and item # 97, part # 125-690 hub. disc
wheel.
The wire-wheel hubs are different right to left as the thread handing for
the spinner differs. The disc-wheel hubs are the same both sides. It does
not list a part number for the complete axle, or even the casing, the fact
only one is shown is just an illustration, not a statement that the axle is
the same for whire-wheel and disc-wheel applications. If you look at item
86, axle-shaft or half-shaft you will see there are different parts for wire
wheels and disc wheels but again only one is shown for illustration
> Having not handled these parts, I'm at the mercy of those that have.
> Why is there a width difference if zthe vehicle frames are the same ?
Because the offset of wire-wheels and disc-wheels are different. The
centre-line of the rim is much closer to the face of the hub and hence
brake-drum in whire-wheels than disc. This means that on any given axle,
the rear track of wire-wheels will be closer than the rear track of disc
wheels. In order to have the same rear track on both, given the limited
space available for the rear wheels, the wire-wheel axle has to be narrower
than the disc-wheel axle. The same difference in track occurs at the front,
of course, but because there is bags of clearance for both (original) wheels
it is not necessary to compensate and so the front track of wire-wheel cars
is an inch or two narrower than disc-wheel cars.
> oh......
> *There does seem to be a minimal distance difference in the pictured item
# 95/ hub
> extension of the wire wheel, different than the thickness of the drum on
the disc
> wheel hub, say 1/4". If that's the difference, can a plate be drilled to
the bolt
> pattern of the disc wheel and be fitted to the disc wheel hub to take up
that difference ?
> 1. is that practical ?
> 2. is there enough thread extension of the disc wheel stud to do that
effectively ?
That is what spacers do, it is usual to fit longer studs if required.
Paul.
/// or try http://www.team.net/cgi-bin/majorcool
/// Archives at http://www.team.net/archive
|