Click here to return to the home page.
Image of a road.
Who's Online Now
8 registered members (Kevcaster, DJC, PaulV, +8Rich, M3W55, Heinz, Uther, truckin-on), 112 guests, and 12 spiders.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Top Posters(30 Days)
+8Rich 256
John V6 156
CooperMan 108
Newest Topics
Babs a brief history.
by +8Rich. 24/08/19 09:54 PM
The Plus Six road ahead...
by pete757. 24/08/19 09:26 PM
Is the footwell storage box really useful?
by Marmota. 24/08/19 08:36 PM
Lavenham Classics
by Richard Wood. 24/08/19 07:28 PM
Upstaged again!
by PhilRoyle. 24/08/19 04:42 PM
Heater control sticking
by DJC. 24/08/19 03:19 PM
Plus 6 vs Jag - Pistonheads Review
by Fat Wolfie. 24/08/19 08:12 AM
Latest Photos
FolkMog in Wales
Roads less travelled  2
Mk 2 tool tray
Roads less travelled..?
My Morgan related badges
Newest Members
OhioM3W, Gandalf1, BigLes, Lenmog, TVRWill
6660 Registered Users
Forum Statistics
Forums33
Topics35,962
Posts580,598
Members6,660
Most Online459
Aug 3rd, 2019
Today's Birthdays
No Birthdays
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Anti-tramp bars - technical question #558428
07/02/19 01:28 PM
07/02/19 01:28 PM
Joined: Jul 2014
Posts: 465
Cornwall
griffo Offline OP
Learner Plates Off!
griffo  Offline OP
Learner Plates Off!

Joined: Jul 2014
Posts: 465
Cornwall
We plan to fit anti-tramps bars to Possum to complement the panhard rod and LSD and limit spring windup in the light of the extra power and torque of the Ecoboost engine. The questions is: is there any reason the bars cannot be reversed and connected to the rear spring hangers rather than the front ones? Superficial examination would suggest this would be easier and avoid having to cut the floor away to achieve clearance. Is there any technical reason why the bars would not operate properly this way round? Grateful your views.

Last edited by griffo; 07/02/19 01:29 PM.
Re: Anti-tramp bars - technical question [Re: griffo] #558431
07/02/19 02:11 PM
07/02/19 02:11 PM
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 17,597
South Yorkshire
DaveW Offline
Roadster Guru
DaveW  Offline
Roadster Guru
Member of the Inner Circle

Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 17,597
South Yorkshire
All I can say is that with the conventional mount, the bar will be compressed under load as the axle rotates backwards against the forward rotation of the wheels.

So with a rear mount the bar will be under tension. Not sure how easy it would be to mount to the rear hangers?


DaveW
2005 Corsa Red Roadster S1
2016 Saffron Yellow (Narrow) Plus 4
Re: Anti-tramp bars - technical question [Re: griffo] #558443
07/02/19 03:18 PM
07/02/19 03:18 PM
Joined: Feb 2016
Posts: 1,842
East Harling, Norfolk UK
Richard Wood Offline
Talk Morgan Enthusiast
Richard Wood  Offline
Talk Morgan Enthusiast

Joined: Feb 2016
Posts: 1,842
East Harling, Norfolk UK
Some useful stuff from Lorne here particularly the comments about further limiting suspension movement.

Although most reaction arms (brake or transmission) are designed to be under tension when needed (which seems instinctively right), the five link coil over system on latest Roadsters creates both.



Sorry this doesn't answer your query but given all the other work you have done on Posum, would it be reasonable to suggest going straight for the SSL 5 link system


Richard

2018 Roadster - Red/Magnolia - "Morton"
1967 Land Rover series 2a SWB
1960 Velocette Venom
Re: Anti-tramp bars - technical question [Re: griffo] #558450
07/02/19 03:58 PM
07/02/19 03:58 PM
Joined: May 2012
Posts: 892
Sumerset
Rog Offline
Talk Morgan Regular
Rog  Offline
Talk Morgan Regular

Joined: May 2012
Posts: 892
Sumerset
Originally Posted By griffo
Is there any technical reason why the bars would not operate properly this way round? Grateful your views.

Umm…. two scenarios depending on where it was fixed maybe thinking

If the tramp bar was fixed to the rear spring eye then might the shackle bracket rotation still allow the axle to tramp or twist should the front portion of the leaf spring “winds up” under acceleration or braking?

Or

If the tramp bar was fixed to the rear chassis eye then the leaf spring might become much stiffer as the tramp bar would prevent the shackle bracket rotating and preventing the leaf spring from extending in length as the spring was loaded vertically?


Roger
Re: Anti-tramp bars - technical question [Re: griffo] #558458
07/02/19 04:30 PM
07/02/19 04:30 PM
Joined: Jul 2014
Posts: 465
Cornwall
griffo Offline OP
Learner Plates Off!
griffo  Offline OP
Learner Plates Off!

Joined: Jul 2014
Posts: 465
Cornwall
Ah Roger,
I think you may be right. Thanks for those thoughts. The SSL system would actually be the answer - it's just a question of money.
P

Re: Anti-tramp bars - technical question [Re: griffo] #558506
07/02/19 08:02 PM
07/02/19 08:02 PM
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 11,597
Mandello del Lario, Lake Como,...
Gambalunga Offline
Member of the Inner Circle
Gambalunga  Offline
Member of the Inner Circle

Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 11,597
Mandello del Lario, Lake Como,...
What the heck! It's only money. spend drive


Peter

[Linked Image]
Re: Anti-tramp bars - technical question [Re: griffo] #558526
07/02/19 10:08 PM
07/02/19 10:08 PM
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 3,998
Cologne, Germany
Heinz Online content
Talk Morgan Addict
Heinz  Online Content
Talk Morgan Addict

Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 3,998
Cologne, Germany
I think the front parts of the leaf spring should be calmed down because there the force of the cardan shaft there twists the spring to an S.

Have a look at this two videos, without and with anti tramp bars. Filmed from underneath at the leaf spring.

https://youtu.be/otP5xU8qvYY

https://youtu.be/yaVDqJEEKR8

Re: Anti-tramp bars - technical question [Re: griffo] #558571
08/02/19 07:56 AM
08/02/19 07:56 AM
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 537
Norway
S
Soleng Offline
Talk Morgan Regular
Soleng  Offline
Talk Morgan Regular
S

Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 537
Norway
Look at the Mogvette rear suspension.

Harald


+4 4-seater 2008 Squadron Blue


Moderated by  Aeroman, Simon 

Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.1