tigers
[Top] [All Lists]

More confounding ride height nonsense!!!

To: <tigers@autox.team.net>
Subject: More confounding ride height nonsense!!!
From: "Tom Witt" <wittsend@jps.net>
Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2003 11:57:08 -0700
  As I continue to deal with "my" ride height issue I am finding some very
interesting things. The Tiger, likely due to it's short wheel base is very
sensitive to weight distribution. When I first saw how Rootes wanted the car
set up for alignment (gap gauges, weights etc.) I thought it was some stodgy
(stupid) British way of doing things. Now perhaps I see there is a reason. I
properly loaded my car with weighty items to simulate the missing pieces
including full fluids (mind you this is for front spring height adjustment -
not alignment). However, I did not connect the shocks to inhibit spring
travel. With the CAT front springs it appeared the car was inclined upward
in the front about 3/8" (as measured from the supposed level side trim).
     Visually it did not quite look correct. In part that is likely because
of the arc of the bottom of the sill and the inward curvature of the lower
front fender. Thus, I set out to get a SLIGHT downward inclination towards
the front for a desirable visual perspective as well to compensate for front
lifting during acceleration. I therefore cut 3/8" (only the flat coil)  from
the top of each spring (from 10-1/2" to 10-1/8") expecting a 3/4" drop (2 to
1 ratio on the spring cut) at the front and thus an ever so slight downward
inclination to the front. Much to my suprize this took what I thought was
1-1/2" gap on the passenger bump stop and left only 1/2"!!! When I did the
driver's side the difference was only 1/2" from 1-1/2" to 1". Thinking that
the problem might be because the spring no longer sat flat in the donut I
(with careful regards to heat) tack welded on  a small section of the cut
coil to load the spring equally 180 degress apart. However, this made no
change!
   Once again exasperated that I sould have "left worst enough (the 3/8"
upward frontal incline) alone" I sat my 150 lbs on the driver's front fender
and noticed it move downward about 2 plus inches. I then rangled up my two
kids weighing  a combined 130 lb's and had them stand on the driver's door
sill. Now the bump stop gaps were near identical.
   So, should it be equal with or without the driver?
   To tell you the true I'm still perplexed. When I pulled the original
springs there was about 1/2" to 3/4" difference in the free length. Also the
driver's side has one of those twist in spacers. My car came with
215-60-13's on the front and the spacer might likely have been needed for
tire clearance. The front clip was bent at the wheel wells (though the frame
"appears" not to be bent).  Thus, with all these vaiables I couldn't tell
what the original condition was before I redid my front end. Additional I
live in Thousand Oaks infamous "cracked slab" tract. Therefore my garage
floor tilts a bit (and just not for drainage!) most of the car though is on
one techtonic garage plate and what isn't is only slightly off.
  I guess I feel like a dog chasing it's tail. There seems to be no original
(Rootes) definable ride height (from spacific frame members - yes, I know
the "ground clearance" is plublished). Even if there was I would have to
compensate for my tire size. The Tiger seems sensitive to weight
distribution and if level without a driver it would seem to lean with one
(and what car moves about without a driver?) and what if you carry a
passenger - change the springs???. To add to the mix is that I found the
shocks (non-gas), that in theory shouldn't ultimately (after the shock
action ceases) alter compression under weight do. With a shock on just one
side of the front I saw only 1/4" difference when I sat my 150 lb's on the
front of the car. Without shocks it is about 1-1/4". Cutting an equal amount
from both springs gives nearly a 1" difference side for side at the bump
stop. Of interest is that when jacking at the lower A frame (to install the
spring) the passenger spring compresses a whole lot more than the driver's
spring and under those kind of weight loads bent frames or uneven garage
floors would likely be nulled out as culprits.
  What is it with these Tiger's,...... or is it only mine? Vertually every
part needs to be bent, hammered, filed, ground down etc. to get it to fit
back on the car it was previously installed on. If Rootes had to put them
together this way the first one would still be on the assembly line. At this
point I'm just going to put it together and a year or so from now when I
possibly might be able to drive the thing I'll see what the end results are.
The (current) end result is about a 1" inclination downward towards the
front (measured from the side trim) measured from the extreme ends of the
car. Oh, yea that's another thing even though the bump stops show a 1"
difference the side trim measurements are quite equal!
   I have to say that after 3-1/2 years of welding and grinding and painting
to repair rusted sills, floors, front clips as well the whole front and rear
suspension I was looking forward to actually putting some parts back on the
car. Now, however, I'm finding it to be a continuation of the "black hole"
of frustration that I though I was paying my dues up front for with all my
initial hard work.
"No gain with Rogaine" Mechanically going bald (I'm pulling my hair out),
Tom Witt

----- Original Message -----
From: Jane & Steve Sage <ssage@socal.rr.com>
Cc: <tigers@autox.team.net>
Sent: Tuesday, August 19, 2003 10:41 PM
Subject: Another Ride Height Question


> Tom's question about correct ride height reminds me to ask about a
> related question with my Tiger. The gaps between the top of the tires
> and the bottom of the wheel arches are different on the left (driver's)
> and right sides of the car. The front gaps are approximately 2" left
> (driver's side) and 2 1/2" passenger side. The rear wheel gaps are
> approximately 1" drivers side and 1 1/2 (maybe 1 3/4") passenger side.
> I've always has a slight sensation of wanting to slide toward the door
> when sitting in the passenger seat which may indicate the seat needs to
> be re-done, or maybe that 1/2 to 3/4 height difference left to right is
> contributing.The gaps should be the same on both sides of the car, right?
>
> Could my Tiger being "height challenged", as they say these days, be
> caused by the rear driver's side leaf spring needing to be re-arched,
> and/or the front spring need replacement? I don't think shock absorbers
> would affect ride height, or would they? They're old Spax adjustible
> shocks, but appear to work properly and do not leak.
>
> Steve Sage
> 1967 MK1A

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>