Click here to return to the home page.
Image of a road.
Who's Online
1 registered (Graham, G4FUJ), 93 Guests and 15 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Latest Photos
SwanMog Christmas party
Finished Plus 4 Side View
Mkiss Mog +4 fourseater
Management of cooling air flow
Morgan Rutherford Modsports +8
Newest Topics
12 volt wiring help please!
by Fat Wolfie
15/01/19 07:09 PM
Ford VW Alliance confirmed
by +8Rich
15/01/19 06:56 PM
Spotted this web site
by Jack The Lad
15/01/19 02:43 PM
Jubilee Sailing Trust
by Gambalunga
15/01/19 02:13 PM
Just in case....
by Gambalunga
15/01/19 02:07 PM
nc 500 advice
by B3MOG
14/01/19 08:25 PM
Towing a trailer in France
by Island Mog
14/01/19 08:18 PM
Newest Members
PJS, 250swb, Mkiss, jacquesj, Dodger
6332 Registered Users
Shout Box

Forum Stats
6,332 Registered Members
33 Forums
33,973 Topics
543,314 Posts

Most users ever online: 341 @ 11/02/18 10:30 PM
Today's Birthdays
olleyjp, tarutino
Page 3 of 4 < 1 2 3 4 >
Topic Options
#550964 - 31/12/18 02:36 AM Re: SSL verses Rutherford? [Re: Redfate]
Heinz Offline

Talk Morgan Addict

Registered: 07/09/09
Posts: 3350
Loc: Cologne, Germany
I have no experience with the SSL kit but here we have a lot of satisfied users. On my 2014 4/4 I have changed the dampers with AVO ones all around which are adjustable. And I have 140 pound springs of Mulfab in the front as well as the 4 seater 4 leaf springs in the back. The new rear leaf springs was the latest change in September of this year. Therefore I can report which single change has which effect.
It depends what you want, I can say that this final setup is very good and enjoyable. Especially the rear leaf springs allow to set the rear dampers softer and the result is a good match. With the original much too soft leaf springs she bottomed out at each railway crossing and consequently I hardend the dampers. That was a bad compromise because a damper has not the function of a spring. Now, with the stiffer leaf springs she rides softer but much more controlled and without bottoming because I can afford to set the damper softer.
A side effect is, that the braking is much more effective and the car feels very secure. Another very enjoyable side effect is, that with the stiffer leaf springs you have an immediate acceleration feel when throttling. And the cardan will not touch the floor any longer under hard acceleration in first gear when your tank is full and you drive with a passanger.

Both positive effects are caused by the stiffer leaf spring. A too soft spring as the OEM Morgan one is has the ability to warp. It becomes an S. Thus the energy of the acceleration does not feed directly the wheels, but this energy is consumed first by deforming the springs. Thus the indirect time-delayed feeling when acceleration is wanted.

To summarize, my investments were not too high. Regardless if you want to invest in SSL front system (which I personally would not do so far), it is very important to have the rear optimized in any case. As I prefer the more classic and rustical route. And the fpur leaf 4 seater springs are way cheaper than a 5 link rear axle.

Top
#550980 - 31/12/18 10:14 AM Re: SSL verses Rutherford? [Re: Redfate]
Redfate Offline
Just Getting Started

Registered: 30/01/18
Posts: 62
Loc: London England
Hi guys,
The one thing that seems glaringly obvious from all this advice is that any change will be an improvement over the stock set up :-)
And all of you that have changed something have been very happy with the results.
I find that very reassuring, as it looks like I won't make a mistake and buy a poor set up which ever I choose.
Worse case scenario, if I end up not buying the best one, is it will still be big improvement by the sounds of it :-)
Also I now know I can find a way to stop the clattering for sure :-)
Thank you all,
Paul

Top
#550990 - 31/12/18 12:10 PM Re: SSL verses Rutherford? [Re: Redfate]
IvorMog Offline

Talk Morgan Regular

Registered: 17/04/17
Posts: 672
Loc: Staffordshire
I researched this long and hard before I bought and in the end went for the SSL and fitted it myself.

To get the optimum set up on the "Rutherford" setup or similar fixed spring methods you have to make sure you have exactly the correct length springs to get the correct interaction between the main and rebound just kissing the stub axle whereas with the SSL you can adjust it to get that relationship perfectly setup. Even then there will be some settlement in the first few (500 - 1000) miles and you can readjust with the SSL to get back to the correct setup.

You can't readjust the fixed spring setup without fitting new springs or shimming it and that means stripping it all down again or going back to the dealer.

So adjustability is one big benefit but don't underestimate the effect of the secondary rate riser spring on the SSL. It means you can start with a slightly softer main spring which give a very compliant cruising ride but than stiffens up with more aggressive cornering and absorbs some of the pothole bumps as the rate riser spring comes into play.

And a final benefit for me is that the preload is adjustable so when you are fitting it you don't have to compress all the preload. You can fit it with very little preload and then adjust to suit when everything is in place and fully contained. IMO much easier and safer. ( Although compressing springs is not necessarily unsafe if you do it properly and take the right precautions.)

As a generalisation, you can buy and self fit the SSL for about the same price as a dealer fitted "Rutherford" setup.

But then you also get the satisfaction of having sorted your own front end whilst really understanding how it works and being able to "play" with it in the future.

BTW, when I did fit the SSL it was a huge improvement over the standard setup both in cruising and spirited driving.


Edited by IvorMog (31/12/18 12:12 PM)
_________________________
Bob

1999 4/4 1.8 Zetec Silvertop

Top
#551001 - 31/12/18 02:20 PM Re: SSL verses Rutherford? [Re: IvorMog]
Gambalunga Offline

Member of the Inner Circle

Registered: 03/09/11
Posts: 10502
Loc: Mandello del Lario, Lake Como,...
I would agree 100% with both Tony and Bob smile
_________________________
Peter


Top
#551003 - 31/12/18 02:35 PM Re: SSL verses Rutherford? [Re: IvorMog]
Hamwich Offline

Talk Morgan Sage

Registered: 28/04/08
Posts: 6960
Loc: Gloucestershire, UK
Originally Posted By IvorMog
I researched this long and hard before I bought and in the end went for the SSL and fitted it myself.

To get the optimum set up on the "Rutherford" setup or similar fixed spring methods you have to make sure you have exactly the correct length springs to get the correct interaction between the main and rebound just kissing the stub axle whereas with the SSL you can adjust it to get that relationship perfectly setup. Even then there will be some settlement in the first few (500 - 1000) miles and you can readjust with the SSL to get back to the correct setup.

You can't readjust the fixed spring setup without fitting new springs or shimming it and that means stripping it all down again or going back to the dealer.

So adjustability is one big benefit but don't underestimate the effect of the secondary rate riser spring on the SSL. It means you can start with a slightly softer main spring which give a very compliant cruising ride but than stiffens up with more aggressive cornering and absorbs some of the pothole bumps as the rate riser spring comes into play.

And a final benefit for me is that the preload is adjustable so when you are fitting it you don't have to compress all the preload. You can fit it with very little preload and then adjust to suit when everything is in place and fully contained. IMO much easier and safer. ( Although compressing springs is not necessarily unsafe if you do it properly and take the right precautions.)

As a generalisation, you can buy and self fit the SSL for about the same price as a dealer fitted "Rutherford" setup.

But then you also get the satisfaction of having sorted your own front end whilst really understanding how it works and being able to "play" with it in the future.

BTW, when I did fit the SSL it was a huge improvement over the standard setup both in cruising and spirited driving.


I fully support everything Bob says. I fitted my SSL setup on April 12th 2013. I needed to adjust it a couple of times in the first 500 miles but since then I've not needed to touch it, it's been perfect.

Wild horses on their bended knees wouldn't persuade me to go back to a stock setup.
_________________________
Tim H.
1986 4/4 VVTi Sport, 2002 LR Defender, 1957 R4 CV, 2005 Ferrari Vipar

Top
#551008 - 31/12/18 03:05 PM Re: SSL verses Rutherford? [Re: Redfate]
Heinz Offline

Talk Morgan Addict

Registered: 07/09/09
Posts: 3350
Loc: Cologne, Germany
IvorMog, that sounds like a very reasonable pro for a try of SSL, not me right now, but everyone who is about to make a decision.

Top
#551051 - 31/12/18 05:06 PM Re: SSL verses Rutherford? [Re: Redfate]
sospan Offline
Charter Member

Registered: 31/05/10
Posts: 5808
Loc: Llanelli
Interesting comments. For the front, the SSL seems to have good points re set up and post bedding in readjustment. I have read through the fitting and setup instructions and fairly straight forward. Also had a chat with Peter Ballard at Williams open day. I am becoming swayed towards it.
_________________________
Red Plus8

Top
#551058 - 31/12/18 05:12 PM Re: SSL verses Rutherford? [Re: Redfate]
Redfate Offline
Just Getting Started

Registered: 30/01/18
Posts: 62
Loc: London England
Hi IvorMog, that was just the sort of reply I was hoping for, someone who had done it themselves and was happy with the result, Thank you :-)
I love to do things myself when ever possible and hearing from someone who has already suceeded always helps :-)
I've just read Daves thread about fitting his own pannard rod and that sounds worthwhile too.

Top
#551092 - 31/12/18 07:17 PM Re: SSL verses Rutherford? [Re: Redfate]
Gambalunga Offline

Member of the Inner Circle

Registered: 03/09/11
Posts: 10502
Loc: Mandello del Lario, Lake Como,...
Just be aware that a panhard rod will stiffen up the rear suspension a little. It depends very much on your driving style as to whether or not you will notice a benefit. If you tend to corner fairly hard, particularly if you start to feed in throttle as you hit the apex, you will notice an improvement. If you have a more relaxed driving style you probably won't notice any difference.

Just as a little aside a panhard rod, a Watt's linkage, or some other form of lateral control must be used if coil spring suspension, such as the 5 link suspension, is fitted. Leaf springs have an inherent resistance to to lateral movement.
_________________________
Peter


Top
#551944 - 05/01/19 05:46 PM Re: SSL verses Rutherford? [Re: Redfate]
series1 Offline
New to Talk Morgan

Registered: 07/10/17
Posts: 5
Loc: Worcestershire
Hi not long purchased a 2014 plus 4 with 2500 on the clock after a run to Yorkshire decided to renew all the suspension after looking around and trying a plus 4 with just the front fitted I decided on SSL front and rear, boy what a difference,the car is now very usable,fitted rear myself easier than i thought ,leaf springs came out easy,on front fitted chrome kingpins,steering now lighter, so very pleased with set up.If any body wants to try mine they are welcome,duncan
_________________________
duncan series 1 climax, TR +4, plus 4 GDI
SSL F&R suspension

Top
Page 3 of 4 < 1 2 3 4 >

Moderator:  Aeroman, Boshly, Simon