GMG I find this an interesting discussion
Me too.
(forgive my use of laymen terminology and not being technically minded and a complete novice in this field of understanding),
Actually, IMHO, those characteristics are an advantage. You begin with a fresh slate rather than trained inherited misconceptions. Mechanics is not magic and Morgans are simple. Car terminology is too often misleading. For example shocks or shockers have little to do with what they actually do. The British term dampers is more accurate. I used to avoid confusion by merely calling everything a "thingie".
Very logical considering I grew up in a world of British, American and French terms.
I have dictionaries of many language equivalence up on gomog.so from what I understand a shortened ( preferably progressive) rebound spring, all other things being in good order, is all that is really necessary to improve the front suspension compliance and ride. Does a shortened rebound spring in any way effect the ride height
Not much. I cut mine because I was told to long ago by trusted fellows using the most common method of Morgan design, trial and error. With Morgans, theory is best after the fact as it is impossible to precisely quantify each trad chassis flexing. making any third party front system only by coincidence.
A protective cushioning is wise, but as Peter Ballard notes, a standard rebound spring in contact adds to the resistance (the spring rate) of the stub axle to movement. Hook's Law. Like other such protective measures, a better solution would be a rubber/neoprene which is the most commonly used bump stop. cushion that is not in action with normal driving dynamics. But I have never tried it. Earlier Morganistes discovered this decades before.
Yes. You can increase ride height in front in many ways. I imagine even more rebound strength or springs length will raise or lower the front..while sadly raising or lowering the effective front end spring rate. Old style experts, we all know, have remarked on how long the Suplex progressive springs are. That means LOTS of pre-load which obviously will tend to get you back to the same place. I like the adjustable main springs, though there are many Main rates offered at normal prices. The key is that the rebound or whatever you use as a protection against bottoming out is not engaged at rest.The front suspension travel, in my opinion is so small that, at best, it is there to eliminate steering wheel feedback. Trad comfort is in the back not the front..though I imagine we pre-load the rear through frame flex. The degree of this will vary from chassis to chassis. If you want to understand a Morgan, do a run without front springs at all.
If I wanted to say raise the ride height and improve the ride comfort how would I go about it at the front, as ground clearance is always an issue fully loaded, I'm more interested in outright touring comfort than out and out handling but would not want to compromise either too much.. The thought of having to adjust shocks for each different type of journey, is not something I would look forward to.
A bit confused here. I have never found front clearance on a trad an issue. Lots of it. You must be talking to rear clearance, of which there is been problems since the MMC started to make musical leaf springs in the early 2000s. Cheaply made leaf springs collapse unmercifully, one supplier after another. My best suggestion is that new fellow BCC, but NOT his antitramp models. It would also be great to get his spring rates. That is hopefully the ideal. If you want to raise the rear, you can place a raising block above the springs which does the opposite of placing a lowering block under the leaf springs. This is another cheap fix that will also effect your comportment. The best solution is always the right leaf springs and rte arc'èd for the car. (duh!)
You should have 6".
I have a 2012 Plus 4 sports, so from what I've read so far at the rear the condition of the leaf springs is far more critical to the cars road manners. I've over the years heard mention different numbers of leaves in the springs and having mention of using the 4 seater springs, having had a Roadster 4 seater, I wasn't to impressed with that set up at all, as I felt the power overwhelmed the rear setup too easily.
Absolutely correct. IMHO. I have tried scores of Morgans, new and old.With Rutherford advising, I have used the older 5 leaves on two Morgans and with Peter advising I tied 4 leaves on our UK car. The number of leafs only is a measure if one uses the same manufacturer. For example, I like 5s of the old leafs (mine have lasted 22 years and counting) and I was pleased with the newer 4s when I found a set that didn't sag. I woud usge the spring rate somewhere between the old 5-6s..almost ideal. I need antitramps and Peter's are the smartest. I have no idea of how they are made now. And the MMC antitramp system makes no sense. At least they do not shear anymore...which was a plague when Morgan first tried to copy Mulberry.
Your annoyance at the back is also caused by unwise packing on mog trips. People pack all sorts of heavy stuff on the luggage rack, the effect of which is multiplied by being cantilevered far past the rear axle. Huge heavy cases full of heaviest stuff, which badly prejudices comfort and comportment during the most precious time you use your Morgan. Use the rear rack for the lightest stuff you have (clothing) and pack the heavy stuff , toiletries, computers, parts, tools, where is actually assists handling. Bad rear springs and cantilevered weight are no fun. If you have that combination, take your mundanemobile and have a safer, better time.
I appreciate there are many varied views in this, .
Me too. But we cannot learn through what we are told to do. Mistakes are costly but the only way to learn. It is people like yourself that spur improvement and understanding. Let common sense be your guide. There is no magic here..just the same mistakes made over and over again.
By the way, all adjustable dampers lose their adjustability the first time they bottom out,which usually happens in the first few hours. You can repair that by sending them to the manufacturer, but it does change their vulnerability.
What I do like about the new systems is that they force undone maintenance as a incidental consequence of their installation. The difference between a maintained trad and one that is negligibly done is AMAZING. Little little of what I am suggesting costs much. Proper leaf springs last for AGES and proper maintenance and packing costs nothing. Sadly, the current designer put even more weight cantilevered out back during his trad tenure.
L (with 400,000+ kms long distance mogging and counting)
