• Hi Guest!
    If you appreciate British Car Forum and our 25 years of supporting British car enthusiasts with technical and anicdotal information, collected from our thousands of great members, please support us with a low-cost subscription. You can become a supporting member for less than the dues of most car clubs.
    There are some perks with a member upgrade!
    **Upgrade Now**
    (PS: Subscribers don't see this gawd-aweful banner
Tips
Tips

Rear Tube Shock Conversions

Share this page

A guy in our club did it on a solid axle 4 - I'll have to see if I can dig up a picture. It's really just a triangle plate with a bolt through the middle that he fabricated himself.

I'm just not thrilled with the idea. Basically he bolted the top of the shock to the sheet metal kind of where the rear shelf is behind the seat. Seems to me that you'd be transfering a lot of stress to the body instead of keeping it on the frame where it belongs (in my opinion).

The only wierdness he ran into was with the leaf springs. Said something about having to use later solid-axle springs that sit at a different height than the earlier ones (???)
 
I have the second kit same as TR6Bill and TRboost. I've had them on for 2 years now. A definite improvement over the stock ones. Not concurs but a much better ride.
 
I'm interested in this also. Someone was selling conversion kits for solid axle cars recently on EBay. I think it used a low pressure KYB. Some of the stuff I have read said there was no advantage to switching away from the lever types; but in most cases they were referring to racing applications. Race tracks are hopefully not as rough as most streets.
 
[ QUOTE ]
The only wierdness he ran into was with the leaf springs. Said something about having to use later solid-axle springs that sit at a different height than the earlier ones (???)

[/ QUOTE ]

Yup. The later solid axle cars used what is referred to as re-cambered (more arch) road springs along with distance pieces. The idea was to minimize roll steer. I put these on my 63 TR4. Made the distance pieces out of square tube. I assume he did this to move the lower mount for the tube shock downward so he could find a shock that would fit.
 
[ QUOTE ]
...it's really just a triangle plate with a bolt through the middle that he fabricated himself. I'm just not thrilled with the idea. Basically he bolted the top of the shock to the sheet metal kind of where the rear shelf is behind the seat... transfering a lot of stress to the body instead of keeping it on the frame where it belongs (in my opinion).

[/ QUOTE ]

Ouch! Run, don't walk, away from *any* kit or DIY that attaches the top of the shocks to the body! Even if it's well reinforced to keep the shocks from eventually punching through the sheetmetal, it will only be a matter of time until the constant upward beating lifts the body off the frame. Just my 2 cents worth! /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cowboy.gif
 
[ QUOTE ]
Race tracks are hopefully not as rough as most streets.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sometimes they are, sometimes they aren't.

There are many "notorious" spots on tracks that really give cars a beating. It might be a transition from concrete to tarmac or old repairs. At everyday speeds, you'd probably not even notice. But at race speed even a minor bump can become a major problem for race car suspensions.

The first San Jose Grand Prix a couple months ago provided a good example. The course is through downtown SJ streets and at one point crosses light rail tracks. Despite a lot of preparation work, pre-race inspection and approval, 160 mph formula cars were bottoming *hard* over what is normally just a minor bump.

A very high number of the cars in all classes went out with broken suspensions and most drivers blamed that one spot on the course. In fact, I think this might have been the highest attrition race of the season. An acquantaince of mine had one of his first DNFs in a long time, thanks to that "minor bump".

(BTW: San Jose has earned "Second Worst Streets in the U.S." recognition, but still chose to host the Grand Prix and build a $345 million City Hall, while cutting the budget for most street repair and maintenance!)

Among others, you might have heard it from me... IMHO, there is little advantage to changing the solid axle/multi-leaf springed cars to tube shocks. The leaf springs have a lot of dampening effect of their own. If need be, there are larger lever shocks that can be used to overcome heat problems such as might crop up with hard driving. Armstrong lever shocks are pretty easily tuned by changing the oil and/or valving. A more solidly designed link from suspension to the shocks lever can help, too, but will make the shock work harder.

On the other hand, a car with monoleaf springs (no leaves rubbing against each other), or IRS cars with coil springs at the rear, might really benefit from upgrading to tube shocks.

Cheers!
 
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
...it's really just a triangle plate with a bolt through the middle that he fabricated himself. I'm just not thrilled with the idea. Basically he bolted the top of the shock to the sheet metal kind of where the rear shelf is behind the seat... transfering a lot of stress to the body instead of keeping it on the frame where it belongs (in my opinion).

[/ QUOTE ]

Ouch! Run, don't walk, away from *any* kit or DIY that attaches the top of the shocks to the body! Even if it's well reinforced to keep the shocks from eventually punching through the sheetmetal, it will only be a matter of time until the constant upward beating lifts the body off the frame. Just my 2 cents worth! /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cowboy.gif

[/ QUOTE ]
For sure. I wouldn't put that on my lawn mower.
 
Back
Top