I do disagree (a little), but the list knows that!! (ta da da ta, defender
of the mighty Swing Spring, but I digress :-})
The reality is that the sag that is common in the later spitfires is
probably due more to poor spring materials or even a spring that is
slightly overstressed. A spring, basically if not overloaded or over
stressed, will not change its character much when in use (look at how long
typical vehicle springs last). However if stressed too far it will lose
its properties no matter what it is installed in. There is nothing wrong
with the spring swing design, it actually works quite well, and I have one
in my Rotoflex style equipped Spitfire, but a couple of factors probably
lead to the sagging problem. The longer axles of the later Spitfires put
greater leverage on the "same" spring I believe is one of them. The
uprated spring Andy just mentioned will help. I've got one in my car and
the rear sits up just fine (actually a tad to high for my taste, I'm still
waiting after a couple of years for it to sag a little)
***************************
>Unfortunately, it is "the nature of the beast". Your sag is due to the
>inherently bad design of the swing-spring rear suspension used on the Spits.
>The longer axles put a greater load on the weaker springs and will
>inevitably cause the sag you are witnessing.
>
>
>
>==AM==
>I don't disagree with Joe per se, but I've long wondered if the greater
>problem is with the increasingly heavier "Federal Spitfires" from 1974 on.
There
>is still a "heavy-duty" version of the swing-spring available from some
>vendors (essentially the same spring used on the 1973 model GT6) that
might be more
> durable.
Barry Schwartz
La Mesa, CA (San Diego)
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.428 / Virus Database: 268.13.18/506 - Release Date: 10/30/2006
6:15 PM
=== This list supported in part by The Vintage Triumph Register
=== http://www.vtr.org
|