Talk Morgan Forums Morgan Sports Cars Maintenance & Servicing Rebound spring gap ??

I just popped in again to see what happened. Thank you all. It became a proper collegiate discussion.


Wise. There is nothing inherently wrong with what you have. It is far better than most here.

I would need all the numbers on the side wall to comment as well as the pressure you have them pumped to.

It means the front developed the Malvern Dance and the owner (apparently very hands on) could not cure it.
Something is amiss. I cannot tell you what effect the damper would be on steering as have never tried a Morgan
that uses such things. I have, however, remotely sorted the causes for using a steering damper ...er.... hundreds
of times. Theoretically, the steering would lose the "Dance", add weight to the front and the steering would be
both smooth and heavy.
Advice? Subject to the tyre stuff needed above, I would do NOTHING. But read on.
______________________________________________________________________


Not really, the cheapest solution was the Factory staff solution at the Factory. They removed the rebounds completely
on the Factory racers when Peter and Charles weren't looking.

But that will give him a front end as bad as most have. There is NO argument amongst the experts that the stock setup
prejudices our cars. Read Peter Ballard's explanation on the sad effect of the stock rebound spring length. By
doing what you suggest your new member would be trebling the spring rate(s) now effecting his stub axles.

In fact, his rebound, cut as it is, is not in play at all so your comment of added stiffness is hard to understand.
And who cares about the spring rate of a spring that is not in play like the Suplex progressive springs Peter sells
when the car is at rest.

(shrug) I merely flattened mine at the cut end after shortening them. And how vital is it to aesthetically modify a spring
that is not in play?
.
Admittedly. It is hard for us amateurs to understand the geometry/physics involved. Perhaps you should speak to Mr. Ballard.
.
As I noted Peter recognized what many did before him..including the production staff at the Works. The viral benefits that
his kit offers are :
1. It relieves the rebound springs' effect in the stub axles like we all did. (HUGE)
2. It forces, as a part of the installation, the front end to receive proper maintenance with most Morgan trads sorely lack

Other than that everything else in the kit is expensive and unneeded extras.

However, those two little vital benefits justify the 1000s paid, needed or not. People pay attention when you make them pay
enough. I just wish it was all less complex and took up less of time for me.
_______________________________________________________________________________________

Does see to have bother anyone. But I agree with you (a bit) only to the extent I did not want my rebounds to rattle.
not that you could hear that much.
I cut mine so they had not effect on the stub axle and tested by seeing the can turn. I really think rubber bumps,
would be best at the bottom. Sadly, my front end on my last remaining Morgan has lasted 20 years now and seems still
perfect (hard chromes and DEVOLs) and I am too lazy to work for little return.

But what you are asserting here is, contrary to same opinion expressed by Mr. Ballard and his disciples, the Factory
staff, the MMC trad developer/Service Manager and all those famous Morgan racers (and yours truly), you believe that
the stock setup we all start with is best. I covered that in my first post. However, you could be right , but can
you explain why? The rest listed have all explained why not. Or is it merely your belief in that the MMC can do no wrong?

L.

Another "con" is that cutting down the rebound spring so reducing the number of coils, increases its spring rate. This means the collective spring rate on rebound is even higher which may not be beneficial, i.e. too much roll resistance affecting steering characteristics. It also increases the importance of rebound spring not being in play when static to avoid very high combined initial spring rate under compression, as may happen if new main springs are fitted for example.

Above mentioned Peter Ballard's (a director at SSL) fuller explanation here

Lorne the standard works for me and I see no need to mess with it. It is just my view. I'm sure it can be improved but I am happy.
The 2014 design with adjustable shocks is far ahead of my to me second hand 1994 4/4 that was my first Mog 20 odd years ago.
I respect others ideas.

My 2011 4/4 had exactly the same issue from NEW. After wading through all the crap I was fed by Morgan in Australia and from HQ it was established that the suspension had NOT been greased at any stage INCLUDING first service.
Infuriatingly dismissive service and poor quality from Morgan once again......

[/b]
As I noted earlier in the thread, if a spring (or any suspension device) is not in contact, its spring rate is irrelevant. A good
analogy would be to hang a coil spring from the rear view mirror and argue about what spring rate it should have to best improve
your car\s comportment. I agree with the subject car's cut down rebound in so far as it accurately recognizes a significant prejudicial
issue needing a cure...with the Works cure, they removed the rebound completely, in Ballard's case he put in a progressive spring that
has practically, speaking, no effect except in VERY rare events, assuming they happen at all. and my case, I would prefer a
neoprene (doesn't fall apart like rubber) short bumper which will not rattle all., is not in play except in extremis and is simple and logical.

I can buy that. Most owners are like you...saving YOUR eyes are wide open. Vintage cars have notorious design and production
faults, just like the cars of today. However, vintage faults are easy to sort by an owner on his driveway. The more drastically one sorts
them, the farther from the vintage "feel" one strays. Many feel that is throwing out the Morgan baby with the bath water. There is no wrong
or right if an owner has what they prefer. I am a BIG fan of understanding so fully knowledgeable choices can be made.
After the first 2-3 years of my confusion, I changed to dedicate my work on my Morgan to simplify it and make it work like the original
designers envisaged or hoped for. In this area, for example, Morgans did not originally have rebound springs..and when they first did they
were loose not under deep compression at rest. They did not have a range of neoprene bumpers to buy at the closest factors in those days.
Of course your personal choices do not prejudice adding to group understanding.

Yes. I added to that article when the GoMoG Helpbox became filled with the owners of later brand new Morgans with a seized
front end. both or one side, straight from start. Of course, the dealers have a check list they are supposed to follow, but many
don't do that as religiously as others. The cause was our old evil friends, improper clearance of the kingpin/bushes or
improperly aligned bushes. (Bushes do not only have to reamed/honed for the kingpins, they also have to be aligned with
each other top and bottoms, It could be the then [?] new Sunnen honing machine they had purchased) . I warned the Factory,
but received no answer. So put it up on gomog. Usually they take heed of that. I no longer deal with them directly except old close
friends..(shh!!)
L.

I should have added a note of thanks to Lorne whose GOMOG page and personal assistance were a great help at the time....

A video showing the work of the front suspension. During the oscillations and the expensions the rebound spring is working, by exemple at 5' during the cornering. The rebound spring seems to be not very compressed at static height.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rjh89U3qTN4&ab_channel=WinfriedFlugsand

No thanks necessary. You just proved to me I am not senile! I REMEMBER you and that was 1000s of Inbox stories ago.
It was right after you received your present Morgan..almost 12 years ago.

Forgive me I am glad to see you are well and you held on to that Morgan! L.


Hi CBY

May I suggest, once again, that you count the coils. I posted the originals of his videos, before and after, many years ago
off the gomog Front Suspension section After shortening the coils, the video
you are referring this group to, he went on to sort the rear suspension. He was happy with the front.
If you would like to look at what he got from the Factory (stock like you have). click HERE
As you will note, the rebound is constantly in action and it is double the spring rate of the man spring.

Be well.

L.

Not the same cars and springs? Seems to have the same number of active coils but difficult to see the bottom sit.
In both video the rebound springs are active in extension. In compression Roadster is better.

How to count the coils:
http://www.planetspring.com/pages/compression-spring-calculator-coil-calculator.php?id=compression

PeterH, my advice on your setup is to check kingpin movement, BUT your rebound spring looks shortened based on counting coils. Your gap, if the car wheels are on the ground looks huge! Is there anything in the car’s history to hint at modifications?
I assume the photo is of the hub with the car on level ground. The hub should then be in a “neutral” setting for the rebound spring, i.e. just able to rotate by hand. Effectively no real compression, just a no gap location. This results in compression when the wheel drops on a rebound down ( hollow/depression/pothole/cornering pressure). This was the situation on both Morgans I have owned, a 1993 4/4 and the current 2002 Plus8. When jacked up the hub drops and the rebound spring compresses. On the Plus8 the coils are almost fully compressed. Maybe weakened and need replacing? Is there analternative same poundage with bigger coil gap? I’ve never considered cutting the rebound back as not necessary. I might try jacking the hub upwards to create mainspring compression and would expect a gap to appear above the rebound spring. My kingpins are free so no sticking. I am likely to replace the main springs with standard poundage ones ( debating bearing version with appropriately shortened spring but not the rebound!).