Click here to return to the home page.
Image of a road.
Who's Online Now
19 registered members (rossocorsa, Luddite, DJC, TigerTim, Peter J, petemog, Heff, RogerQ, John V6, mph, SFO, pandy, DavidR, vittorio, LightSpeed, TBM, Jonathan G, JohnHarris, teifistar), 149 guests, and 17 spiders.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Top Posters(30 Days)
John V6 334
TBM 198
+8Rich 193
Newest Topics
Bluetooth battery condition tracker.
by Luddite. 01/12/20 07:56 AM
First Christmas card today
by +8Rich. 30/11/20 09:39 PM
Sealing wood
by Leroy. 30/11/20 04:00 PM
Balancing wire wheels
by RJW. 30/11/20 02:58 PM
+8 tyres
by Georgetoad. 30/11/20 01:35 AM
Watch point reversing light corrosion
by John V6. 29/11/20 04:30 PM
Aerosol paint for Morgans
by Richard Wood. 29/11/20 01:25 PM
Latest Photos
FolkMog is celebrating 25th year Anniversary
Best of British IMHO!!!
More November Sun...
November Sun
Is this a 4 to 3 wheeler conversion?
Newest Members
E.Gumiero, Grump, Fjmorgan, KJD, Mike Woodroffe
7255 Registered Users
Forum Statistics
Forums34
Topics39,959
Posts662,750
Members7,255
Most Online1,033
Dec 28th, 2019
Today's Birthdays
PSS
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 3 of 4 1 2 3 4
Re: Suspension problem [Re: Richard Wood] #548643
18/12/18 10:02 AM
18/12/18 10:02 AM
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 13,804
Mandello del Lario
Gambalunga Offline
Member of the Inner Circle
Gambalunga  Offline
Member of the Inner Circle

Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 13,804
Mandello del Lario
Since the rate of the of the two springs combine when they are pressing against each other and then suddenly falls when one of the springs (the rebound spring in our case) is fully unloaded the only way to avoid a falling rate system is to ensure that the rebound spring is free at static ride height.

If you want a stiffer suspension the answer is to increase the rate of the main spring. Those with the Suplex or SSL systems have the option of requesting SSL for a suitable spring from the race kit.


Peter

[Linked Image]
Re: Suspension problem [Re: Gambalunga] #548690
18/12/18 01:45 PM
18/12/18 01:45 PM
Joined: Apr 2017
Posts: 1,232
Staffordshire
IvorMog Offline
Has a lot to Say!
IvorMog  Offline
Has a lot to Say!

Joined: Apr 2017
Posts: 1,232
Staffordshire
Originally Posted By Gambalunga
Since the rate of the of the two springs combine when they are pressing against each other and then suddenly falls when one of the springs (the rebound spring in our case) is fully unloaded the only way to avoid a falling rate system is to ensure that the rebound spring is free at static ride height.

If you want a stiffer suspension the answer is to increase the rate of the main spring. Those with the Suplex or SSL systems have the option of requesting SSL for a suitable spring from the race kit.


Also with the SSL you can adjust the height to get the correct level as the springs settle and the new kingpins loosen up slightly.

After a year and 3000 miles my new set up has settled by about 5mm so I will correct that with the adjusters..


Bob

1999 4/4 2 litre Zetec
Re: Suspension problem [Re: DeeDee] #548762
18/12/18 06:52 PM
18/12/18 06:52 PM
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 7,410
Llanelli
sospan Offline
Talk Morgan Guru
sospan  Offline
Talk Morgan Guru

Joined: May 2010
Posts: 7,410
Llanelli
My rebounds are just in contact with the hub and can be rotated when the car is at rest on a level surface. This, to me, is the neutral position when the only loading is from the weight of the car. I also think the upper spring should be neutral (or very close) with perhaps just a hint of compression. In this setup when driving, the springs react from neutral to cope with absorbing travel or releasing as the need arises. By having this neutral, just in contact setting there will be no free play that needs to be overcome before the correct effect is met. Balancing spring rates is important, coupled to suitable pitch of the coils. Very simplified I know but it seems a decent base to work from.
I am tempted by the SSL system for the front but would like to try a car with it first.


Red Plus8
Re: Suspension problem [Re: DeeDee] #548774
18/12/18 07:17 PM
18/12/18 07:17 PM
Joined: Apr 2017
Posts: 1,232
Staffordshire
IvorMog Offline
Has a lot to Say!
IvorMog  Offline
Has a lot to Say!

Joined: Apr 2017
Posts: 1,232
Staffordshire
The upper main spring has to be in compression to take the static weight of the car.

If the car weighs 800kg i.e about 1800lbs then assuming 50/50 weight distribution there is 900lbs at the front or 450lbs per corner.

If the spring rate was 150lbs/inch for example, that would need 3 inch compression to just take the weight of the car.

Maybe a bit more with your surge inducing "heavy" V8 lump.


Bob

1999 4/4 2 litre Zetec
Re: Suspension problem [Re: sospan] #548775
18/12/18 07:23 PM
18/12/18 07:23 PM
Joined: Jun 2015
Posts: 693
North Somerset, UK
Deejay Offline
Talk Morgan Regular
Deejay  Offline
Talk Morgan Regular

Joined: Jun 2015
Posts: 693
North Somerset, UK

Originally Posted By sospan
My rebounds are just in contact with the hub and can be rotated when the car is at rest on a level surface. This, to me, is the neutral position when the only loading is from the weight of the car. I also think the upper spring should be neutral (or very close) with perhaps just a hint of compression. In this setup when driving, the springs react from neutral to cope with absorbing travel or releasing as the need arises. By having this neutral, just in contact setting there will be no free play that needs to be overcome before the correct effect is met. Balancing spring rates is important, coupled to suitable pitch of the coils. Very simplified I know but it seems a decent base to work from.
I am tempted by the SSL system for the front but would like to try a car with it first.

Fully concur with views on rebounds BUT as far as uppers are concerned, isn’t this trying to defy gravity? They have to carry the weight of the front of the car and no matter how strong the spring, or how long or short, it will always be loaded by that weight, so can never be “neutral” like the rebound springs can be.
Apologies if I have misunderstood?


Doug

2011 +4 in Rich Maroon
1972 750 “ComDom” sprinter
1958 Triton 650
1992 Triumph Trophy 900
Re: Suspension problem [Re: DeeDee] #548852
19/12/18 08:19 AM
19/12/18 08:19 AM
Joined: Jul 2015
Posts: 529
Reading
Rob Thornton Offline
Talk Morgan Regular
Rob Thornton  Offline
Talk Morgan Regular

Joined: Jul 2015
Posts: 529
Reading
Maybe a naive observation on my part as I don't pretend to be wholly mechanically minded in this area, but all the comments regarding the optimal setting of the bottom rebound spring seem to be based on user experience rather than technically specified factory data.
Presumably the cars leave the factory with all components set to specified tolerances, clearances etc and further maintenance should aim to maintain these settings unless one chooses to deliberately change them for whatever reason?


Rob T
2001 Royal Ivory Plus 8
Re: Suspension problem [Re: DeeDee] #548882
19/12/18 10:08 AM
19/12/18 10:08 AM
Joined: Feb 2016
Posts: 3,229
East Harling, Norfolk UK
Richard Wood Offline
Talk Morgan Addict
Richard Wood  Offline
Talk Morgan Addict

Joined: Feb 2016
Posts: 3,229
East Harling, Norfolk UK
Have you read the article by Peter Ballard linked above Rob?

It may be backed by his user experience but makes sound technical sense.

Interesting also is that he explains how trad Morgan suspension may improve with age on comfort stakes at least, as the springs shorten with use, particularly the longer compression one, lowering ride height but importantly removing any rebound spring pre-load that may have been present, hence softer linear rate over bumps.


Richard

2018 Roadster - Red/Magnolia - "Morton"
1966 Land Rover series 2a SWB
1960 Velocette Venom
Re: Suspension problem [Re: DeeDee] #548885
19/12/18 10:24 AM
19/12/18 10:24 AM
Joined: Jul 2011
Posts: 666
I
IcePack Offline
Talk Morgan Regular
IcePack  Offline
Talk Morgan Regular
I

Joined: Jul 2011
Posts: 666
Rob my car came out of the factory new. The set up was a right mess, so I for one would say do not trust the factory to have set the suspension correctly. They rely on the end user to sort it out using their knowledge & or their dealers.


4/4 Ivory 4.1:1 axle, Jaguar XE R-Sport.
Re: Suspension problem [Re: DeeDee] #548921
19/12/18 12:37 PM
19/12/18 12:37 PM
Joined: Apr 2017
Posts: 1,232
Staffordshire
IvorMog Offline
Has a lot to Say!
IvorMog  Offline
Has a lot to Say!

Joined: Apr 2017
Posts: 1,232
Staffordshire
As I understand it, the factory viewpoint has changed over the years.

In the old days the front suspension was set with both springs in compression with the consequent falling rate effect. That's just the way it was then.

What I don't know is if the factory now sets the front up as we describe it or do they still use the old set up.

And if they did adopt the new set up, when?


Bob

1999 4/4 2 litre Zetec
Re: Suspension problem [Re: DeeDee] #548923
19/12/18 12:46 PM
19/12/18 12:46 PM
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 18,899
South Yorkshire
DaveW Offline
Roadster Guru
DaveW  Offline
Roadster Guru
Member of the Inner Circle

Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 18,899
South Yorkshire
The front spring rates have changed a few times over the years. The 2016 set up was with SSL springs.
The 2005 set up was with Eibach.
Peter Mulberry has all the rates in his head.

The 2016 suspension is very well resolved. So much so that I've kept the standard Spax and not even thought about changing them yet.

The rears have changed from six leaves in 2005 to four leaves now. The change was around 2012, which was when the weak leaf spring period occurred.

I can only comment on the cars I've had!

On my Plus 4 there's about 5mm compression on the rebounds. It doesn't bother me as 5mm is a tiny amount. Had there been more thread on the base of the kingpin I'd have added spacers under the plate to eliminate it, but there isn't really enough thread.


DaveW
2005 Corsa Red Roadster S1
2016 Saffron Yellow (Narrow) AR Plus 4
Page 3 of 4 1 2 3 4

Moderated by  Aeroman, Simon 

Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.1