triumphs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Spring Height

To: Brian Kemp <bk13@earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: Spring Height
From: Bob Lang <LANG@ISIS.MIT.EDU>
Date: Sat, 01 Jan 2000 11:52:41 -0400 (EDT)
Cc: triumphs@autox.team.net
On Fri, 31 Dec 1999, Brian Kemp wrote:

Brian - I'm cc'ing the triumphs lists because I want to be clear.

> When I have to grab the fender and lift so someone else can get the jack under
> the frame, that's a tad too low.  When you need to drive the car on to some 2"
> high boards to get the jack under the frame, the car is too low.

If you say so. I just carry a 2 X 6 to drive onto... Also, my factory 
jack works just fine to get the car up a bit to get the floor jack under 
it. Also, in the plans is to get a special jack with only 2 inches ground 
clearance needed.

There's more than one way to skin a cat.

> Other than that, TR6s where the frame is not parallel to the ground look
> stupid. 

Umm - okay. I have no idea what you are referring to.

If this was my SUV reference, I'll qualify the statement - I've seen way 
too many TR6's with the so-called heavy duty springs that are way too 
high. Period. This is my opinion.

However, the reason that I don't like SUV imitation TR6's is that a 
friend of mine rolled his TR6 - with the heavy duty springs and the SUV 
stance.

Conclusion - too high.

That is all.

> Brian Kemp
> 72 TR6 - almost a tad to low.

Happy gnu year.
rml
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bob Lang                Room N42-140Q          | This space for rent.
Consultant              MIT Computer Services  |        
Voice: (617)253-7438    FAX: (617)258-9535     |
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
  • Re: Spring Height, Bob Lang <=