triumphs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Driver side lean

To: triumphs@autox.team.net, spitfires@autox.team.net
Subject: Re: Driver side lean
From: ZoboHerald@aol.com
Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2004 12:15:43 -0400
> -----Original Message-----
> GlacierMy 1980 Spitfire has always leaned on the driver side and over
> the
> years I have become used to it....

Joe Curry replied:

> The story is that Triumph in their infinite wisdom chose to install that
> Swing-Spring to correct the Wheel tuck problem instead of Kas Kastner's
> Camber compensator.  In order for it to work, the spring is much softer
> than the early springs and therefore, the driver's weight tends to make
> the spring collapse after a while.  Replacing the spring will solve the
> problem but in a while it will be back....

My admittedly unscientific observation over the years has been that the dreaded 
"sag" from swing-springs generally does NOT occur in the MkIV Spitfires or even 
those early (1973) "Federal" Spitfire 1500s with the wider rear track. It seems 
to be a problem primarily with 1975 and later "Federal" Spitfires with not only 
the rear chassis extensions but also the ever-heavier bumpers on the rear. 
(1974 "Federal" Spitfire 1500s had the extensions, but the added-on rubber 
overriders didn't seem to add that much more weight.)

How about you with, say, UK-spec later Spitfire 1500s, without all the added 
bumper/chassis weight in the rear? Do these cars generally exhibit the same 
"sag" over time? My theory is that the swing-spring wasn't quite heavy-duty 
enough to survive long-term with all the extra weight.

Alternatively, anyone with a later "Federal" Spitfire that has been "lightened" 
by removal of the extra bumper weight? Do you still see the "sag" over time?

--Andy Mace





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