One last question if I may?
Simon explained to me the steering rack used is a Mk1/2 Ford Escort item, if this is correct do you know what ratio was used? Mine seems to be 2.7 turns lock to lock which is fine for road use, however, for more spirited driving and track use where I may need to quickly apply opposite lock, I feel a 2.4 turns LTL rack may be beneficial. Such a ratio swap would be relatively inexpensive, assuming it is indeed an Escort rack, brand new quality Escort steering racks are of course freely available in many ratios from suppliers such as Motorsport Tools etc,. Obviously Monty's steering then becomes heavier, so I suspect it may force an electric power steering conversion which does then start to make the project expensive.
It is indeed a standard 2.7 rack from memory. Easier steering was more relevant than sporting pretensions. Mk 1 and Mk2 basically are identical. The only difference are the threads on the ends. Mk 1 racks are 1/2 unf, Mk 2 are metric, probably M14. The factory track rod ends for rack cars was 1/2" unf.
As it stands the unassisted steering is close to perfect for road driving just as it is, the lower than normal self centering effect is slight and a complete non-issue as in my opinion it only serves to deliver a more connected driving experience, a bit more steering lock would be nice though, although I doubt Monty's turning circle is any worse than a standard Trad Morgan?
I remember measuring the Jack Knight rack travel and comparing to the Escort and they were very much the same, so the amount of total lock will be similar.
If memory behaves, the early Plus 8 stub axles had 6.1/2" from king pin centre to track rod. Later rack stub axles were 5.3/4" centres making them quicker. It is possible to shorten the arms and make a quicker steering, but not a job to be undertaken unless competent. I don't have a workshop anymore. (yet?)
Overall I have to say the Mulfab front wishbone conversion would be an excellent upgrade for any Morgan owner looking to improve the ride quality and turn-in on their Trad, I do however wonder if the addition of a front anti-roll bar could make it even better? It's a shame the system is no longer in production, it seems to me if someone had £6k to spend on improving the ride and handling of their Trad, the wishbone conversion would be a better choice than spending the similar sum on the SSL five link rear suspension kit.
I did have a front anti roll bar on my Roadster initially. Then tried it without and no noticeable difference. There was minimal roll anyway, and all the anti roll bar did
was take away a chunk of ground clearance. Sliding pillar gives a front roll a long way below ground level, depending on the camber. Look at a standard car on track cornering hard and the roll is very pronounced. With the wishbones the front roll centre was designed at 3 inches above ground. The rear roll centre, assuming Panhard Rod fitted will be about 6 or 7 inches, so the roll axis is relatively flat. Don't bother with a front bar.
The wishbone conversion completely removes the antiquated Morgan sliding pillar arrangement and replaces it with the proven setup of coil over dampers with unequal length wishbones, in contrast and to my mind the SSL five link only really gives benefit by replacing the leaf springs with coils and £6k seemed like an awful lot of money for a the small ride quality benefit of coils spring over leaf springs. I also figured the remaining axle location improvements the SSL five link setup offers could be achieved on a leaf sprung car with the simple installation of an inexpensive Panhard rod and anti-tramp bars so his was my approach. However, I decided not to fit the anti-tramp bars because my hope was the BCC anti-tramp springs would mean I didn't need them? It does seem I made the right choice because even though I'm now pushing 200 plus horsepower I've experienced zero tramp on my setup, the quality Bilstein dampers I chose will certainly be helping here too.
Spot on. Heard good reports with the BCC rear springs.
Peter.
