|
Forums34
Topics48,364
Posts813,343
Members9,215
| |
Most Online1,046
Aug 24th, 2023
|
|
|
There are no members with birthdays on this day. |
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9
New to Talk Morgan
|
New to Talk Morgan
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9 |
Read the entire topic, but one thing crossed my mind:
By replacing the top bolt with a stud and thus deleting the oiler, is how is the top bearing lubricated?
Colin M
99 +8 with chrome Mulberry kingpins
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 11,868 Likes: 138
Scruffy Oik Member of the Inner Circle
|
|
Scruffy Oik Member of the Inner Circle
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 11,868 Likes: 138 |
Read the entire topic, but one thing crossed my mind:
By replacing the top bolt with a stud and thus deleting the oiler, is how is the top bearing lubricated?
Colin M
99 +8 with chrome Mulberry kingpins The lower grease nipple allows you to put grease into the gap/reservoir between the two bushes. So long as this is kept replenished the normal suspension movement will ensure the top bush receives sufficient lubrication. Some people like to add grease from the top, others prefer to add heavy gear oil, some (like me) don't bother with either. I think most agree that the original one-shot oiler system just acts to flush grease out and generally create a mess, which is why it was deleted.
Tim H.
1986 4/4 VVTi Sport, 2002 LR Defender, 2022 Mini Cooper SE
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2012
Posts: 1,639 Likes: 20
Talk Morgan Enthusiast
|
|
Talk Morgan Enthusiast
Joined: May 2012
Posts: 1,639 Likes: 20 |
If the tubes haven’t been machined the bores may well be out of round so gap filling capability would be a consideration. Plan A for me is to follow the manufacturer’s instructions and use 648 with my Hilubes. Yes, boring the stub-axle tubes straight would be a sensible move. Not something I could do on my little Myford, but I have made friends with a couple of guys who run a small engineering shop specialising in one-offs/short runs for the aviation industry, and I'm sure I could persuade them to do it for me. The whole Vesconite thing has got me conflicted a bit, to be honest. It's a great material no doubt, and for many the fact that it does not require lubrication would be extremely attractive, but for me personally it's actually a disadvantage in a way. One of the main reasons I love my Morgan so much is that it demands a level of owner involvement much greater than a tin-top. The bi-monthly ritual of getting under the car, greasing the kingpins, checking the suspension and brakes, tightening up any fasteners, and generally fossicking about with the thing is a complete joy for me. I suspect the out of round tolerance on an un machined standard tube would be well within the capability of Loctite but always worth checking. You have hit the nail on the head. I have no intension of missing out on the fun of greasing and that’s why I have added spiral groves to the Hilubes. My motivator was seeing quite how much my Devols were sticking when I jacked up the car one day. That sticking is going to be affecting my ride and suspension. IMO the super low C of F of Hilube over PB and the effect on suspension response is the prize, and of course its extended life potential too. I get my fun from attempting to refine an old Morgan rather than buying a new one. That’s the appeal and DaveW's quote in another recent thread somes it up. They can be bonded but as noted above, it can become a bit of an adventure.
Roger
2011 Plus 4
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 11,868 Likes: 138
Scruffy Oik Member of the Inner Circle
|
|
Scruffy Oik Member of the Inner Circle
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 11,868 Likes: 138 |
I get my fun from attempting to refine an old Morgan rather than buying a new one. That’s the appeal and DaveW's quote in another recent thread somes it up.
That's absolutely it, isn't it? It's a great adventure and huge fun!
Tim H.
1986 4/4 VVTi Sport, 2002 LR Defender, 2022 Mini Cooper SE
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 21,871 Likes: 168
Roadster Guru Member of the Inner Circle
|
|
Roadster Guru Member of the Inner Circle
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 21,871 Likes: 168 |
And I love the title "Boy Engineer". Perhaps we should set up a "Boy Engineer" register and commission a badge. For the "dirty fingernails" on TM.
DaveW
'05 Red Roadster S1
'16 Yellow (Not the only) Narrow AR GDI Plus 4
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 1,943
Talk Morgan Enthusiast
|
|
OP
Talk Morgan Enthusiast
Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 1,943 |
If the tubes haven’t been machined the bores may well be out of round so gap filling capability would be a consideration. Plan A for me is to follow the manufacturer’s instructions and use 648 with my Hilubes. Yes, boring the stub-axle tubes straight would be a sensible move. Not something I could do on my little Myford, but I have made friends with a couple of guys who run a small engineering shop specialising in one-offs/short runs for the aviation industry, and I'm sure I could persuade them to do it for me. The whole Vesconite thing has got me conflicted a bit, to be honest. It's a great material no doubt, and for many the fact that it does not require lubrication would be extremely attractive, but for me personally it's actually a disadvantage in a way. One of the main reasons I love my Morgan so much is that it demands a level of owner involvement much greater than a tin-top. The bi-monthly ritual of getting under the car, greasing the kingpins, checking the suspension and brakes, tightening up any fasteners, and generally fossicking about with the thing is a complete joy for me. The only reason I use Vesconite is its Self Lubricating feature. Now that I am set up for Vesconite it is too easy for Me. However; With Hard Chrome Pins I see no real benefit in changing to Vesconite. I feel that Bronze and Hard Chrome do a good job, and readily available.
Button
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 5,232 Likes: 125
Charter Member
|
|
Charter Member
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 5,232 Likes: 125 |
One of the main reasons I love my Morgan so much is that it demands a level of owner involvement much greater than a tin-top. The bi-monthly ritual of getting under the car, greasing the kingpins, checking the suspension and brakes, tightening up any fasteners, and generally fossicking about with the thing is a complete joy for me.
+1 And for me, the safety net of an excellent network of enthusiast dealers.
Paul
Costock, UK
2014 4/4 Rolls Royce Garnet Red
Disco 5
Teddy - 17h1 Irish Draught cross
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 1,036
Has a lot to Say!
|
|
Has a lot to Say!
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 1,036 |
There have been some interesting thoughts and ideas promoted on this thread. However, there are one or two aspects that haven't been raised.
The first being that there is a vast difference in the viability of a solution when applied in the real world where harsh environments and dynamics play their part and may limit the viability of using adhesives.
Camber and caster angles as well as the Morgan suspension's inherrent design limitations inevitably restrict ease of movement as well as inherrent stiction between the stub axle and the kingpin.
Once on the road, the Morgan's suspension limitations become even greater because braking and cornering forces will cause the stub axle and kingpin to deform (bend if you prefer) which causes further binding. Bottoming out is one manifestation of this limitation.
This dynamic environment may challenge adhesives; coping with radial movement is one thing; holding fast when stiction and flex are gripping parts is another matter entirely.
The stub axle with its welded tube bearing carriers are generally not perfectly aligned; hence the need to ream the PB bushes. I suspect that the welded tubes allow some tolerence for flex in the kingpin and stub axle that would not exist if the whole stub axle was made from one single casting. Aside from the increased weight, it would be likely that the bearing carrier extensions on a single integrated casting would simply crack in dynamic use rendering the stub axle FUBAR in a very short time.
Last edited by Cheshire_David; 03/11/16 10:19 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 1,943
Talk Morgan Enthusiast
|
|
OP
Talk Morgan Enthusiast
Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 1,943 |
There have been some interesting thoughts and ideas promoted on this thread. However, there are one or two aspects that haven't been raised.
The first being that there is a vast difference in the viability of a solution when applied in the real world where harsh environments and dynamics play their part and may limit the viability of using adhesives.
Camber and caster angles as well as the Morgan suspension's inherrent design limitations inevitably restrict ease of movement as well as inherrent stiction between the stub axle and the kingpin.
Once on the road, the Morgan's suspension limitations become even greater because braking and cornering forces will cause the stub axle and kingpin to deform (bend if you prefer) which causes further binding. Bottoming out is one manifestation of this limitation.
This dynamic environment may challenge adhesives; coping with radial movement is one thing; holding fast when stiction and flex are gripping parts is another matter entirely.
The stub axle with its welded tube bearing carriers are generally not perfectly aligned; hence the need to ream the PB bushes. I suspect that the welded tubes allow some tolerence for flex in the kingpin and stub axle that would not exist if the whole stub axle was made from one single casting. Aside from the increased weight, it would be likely that the bearing carrier extensions on a single integrated casting would simply crack in dynamic use rendering the stub axle FUBAR in a very short time. I think these are very valid points. About the only test of a Morgan front suspension/steering system is the "test of time". With the "Suplex Kit" I became aware of "stiction" and "Ride Height". With Vesconite bushes and Hard Chrome pins I have changed the traditional materials Morgan used for years. Bronze Bushes and mild steel pins. With glueing the bushes I would change a "Time tested" system once again. Tires have gotten wider and caster changed, so more tire scrub. Is this serious? I don't know and unless it fails I won't know. But what about a axle breaking? On +4's (old) they are 5/8" and have been known to break. I know of 2 instances of this. The later axle's are 3/4". I know of none breaking. But I wonder if any have? BTW: I often have my stub axle's "Magnafluxed". Cheap Insurance.
Button
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 1,036
Has a lot to Say!
|
|
Has a lot to Say!
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 1,036 |
The TR engined Plus 4s were suseptable to stub axle breakages and I believe that the Plus 4 Super Sports stub axles were beefed up. The Plus 8 stub axles were, I believe, based on these improved ones.
Would I be correct in assuming that all new traditional Morgans have shared the same stub since standardising on the Plus 8 chassis?
Time tested, yes. I'm not sure that Morgan are truly geared up to design and develop new suspension systems and use computer modelling to calculate stress and longevity; perhaps I'm wrong. Unfortunately, Morgan got it wrong when they changed from Armstrong lever arm damper to telescopics in the 1990s - poor design made worse by incorrect specification and cheap and nasty Monroe dampers - crash, bang, wallop!.
The sliding pillar (actually stub axle) has been around a very long time and the materials used (phospher bronze, malleable iron castings, etc, etc) have proved themselves. The problems have occurred when new materials have been used such as vesconite bushes. In theory, they were 'God's gift', in practice they failed to deliver.
I've never considered it necessary to 'magnaflux' or subject my stub axles to non-destructive testing (NDT) but I certainly wouldn't criticise anyone who felt it necessary.
|
|
|
|
|
