Talk Morgan Forums Morgan Sports Cars Maintenance & Servicing The aftermath of Canterbury.................

Perhaps could be part of the awaited Suplex rear conversion?

MGB's (incl V8's)with telescopics use the lower U bolt Plate as a mounting. The issue is the point of rotation of the axle relative to the position of the mount. On the Morgan it is placed so that it blocks rotation when the axle winds up. This is because the mount is parallel with the backplate.
The MGB fixing has the mount at right angles to the backplate so there is no restriction on axle wind up. This could be achieved on the Morgan by a bracket redesign, but it would need anti-tramps on the Roadster for sure.

Having just come to this thread, I apologize for any repetition.

I have been under our 2009 Roadster, with the camera as it is almost impossible to get at the plates due to the Chassis & Exhaust. (after 12500 Miles)

This was the best shot of one side I could get (I Know Dave. Its a mess down there) Now I am wondering if there is a crack on the left side just below the Bolt head?



Looking at these Roadster pics taken in 2011, I cannot see how a Rutherford Conversion would fit without having a whole new Upper fixing place to bring the whole Damper inboard of the Chassis? (however I have not seen one to compare).





I also do not know about 'Axle Wind Up' and its effects but would have thought that with the axle being inside of the 'castings' partially controlled by the Drive Shaft and U Bolts any twisting torque would be taking place inside there?




To me the angle of the Dampers to the axle is totally wrong for the 'Arc' or 'Vertical' movement of the axle as it is held by the Leaf Spring. There must be side ways forces coming into play, if not on the suspect plate, on the Damper Rod?

Whatever the cause it is not a happy situation. I shall ask some questions during our R100 Group Factory Visit on Monday.

Frank

Very interesting and important thread - keep the posts coming

Not sure if it is a crack - difficult to tell. Very interesting photos.

Frank,

looking at the lower photo in your last post we see what happens when a design "evolves", rather a system that was designed for a purpose. The setup was designed for lever dampers, not telescopic tube ones and was designed for less than 100bhp....

IF it had been re-designed for the high power engines we would see the tube hoop brought up to above the top of the wheels so it would cross the body just below the bodywork where the back rail of the hood sits. There would be 2, smaller batteries leaving space for torque reaction/anti tramp bars on both sides and the damper lower mount part of the mount for the torque reaction bars. It would also make it much easier for a Panhard rod system to be fitted.

Of course that would also mean a re-design of the wood frame and other bits and cost a lot, much easier to do what they have done and deal with the occasional problem.

The V6 needs two anti tramp bars and the damper lower mounts need to be high quality forgings, not bits of welded and bent steel. I understand from talking to one dealer for 2014 they will get 2 anti tramp bars, and what is in effect a Suplex front end.

Long term I suspect we will see an Aero Chassis offered with the V6 as a "Roadster Plus, or something.

Me: I can't wait for a Suplex rear suspension upgrade.

The rear axle would also sit under raised/curved rear chassis rails...

Frank, if you compare your photo with the one posted by Jay, I think the bolt holding the bracket is in the area shaded yellow. the blue area is the upper bolt head in Jay's photo. If I am right, what you are interpreting as a crack is probably the top edge of the mounting bracket.

Absolutely!!!!

MG changed the chassis design for the MG TF in 1953, about the time the flatrad was phased out, but Morgan are still using the same basic chassis design as they did back then.


MG TF Chassis

It is all about having more suspension travel including space for re-bound without hitting bump stops or the chassis.

But haven't Morgan always had the same basic chassis design since the first 4/4?

Whoa.............been there before...I'll stop!