Talk Morgan Forums Morgan Sports Cars Classic Morgans (pre-CX) Trad Shock Absorbers

"...it has restricted the turning lock is there any workaround to that/..."

Interested to know this also re BRBs

In my quest for comfort in the 10 years since our 2014 4/4 was new, I have done the following:

1) 2016 - Replaced OE shock-absorbers with AVO adjustables supplied by John Worrall, Heart of England Morgans. The OE items had worked OK when new but wore out very quickly - especially on the front.
2) 2017 - changed the weak OE rear springs and used MulFab 4-seater, 4 leaf springs - made a big difference but did not eliminate the crashing at full deflection
3) 2021 - Fitted Roger’s Spring Assisters - and finally eliminated the crashing at the rear
4) 2024 - Fitted SSL front suspension kit (together with 4 x SPAX adjustable shock absorbers - the rear AVO’s in particular were well past their best). This seems to have eliminated the crashing bottoming out at the front whilst retaining the compliance.

Shortened rebound springs would not have helped on my car as there has always been a free clearance between the rebound springs and the stub axles.

I believe that my era of 4/4 was fitted with front springs that were too light for the task but don’t have anything to substantiate this. I aware of at least one 4/4 of a similar vintage that has been fitted with slightly heavier duty front springs with good results.

Me too.


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.


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.


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".


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.


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)

GMG,

Many thanks for that, much appreciated. I should clarify that the 4 seater Roadster rear suspension was easily overwhelmed with only front occupants, and bottomed out with rear passengers extremely easily. despite uprated adjustable shocks, which as you quite rightly pointed out once bottomed out tend lose their adjustability requiring me to increasing adjust them over time. I avoid using rear carriers, as years of motorcycling has taught me the adverse effect of luggage increasing weight over/beyond the rear wheel and moving the centre of gravity can be very detrimental to handling. and braking.

Do you have any thoughts as to getting around the restriction in turning circle caused by BRB's fitment?

I also meant to increase the ride height at the front, to reduce risk of hitting the Mazda bellhousing, I don't remember the ride height ever being an issue in my Kent or CVH engined Morgans, although speed ramps were far less numerous back then compared to now

I appreciate everyone's contribution, and one of the first areas to check is whether my rebound spring is already under compression.........

If your +4 is still on its original rear springs, it may have been built during the period where MMC used un-tempered liquorice for rear springs. Worth checking for sagging. The best source for replacements has changed since I did mine - I cannot remember who people are going to. As an aside, if your +4 Sport doesn't have a spare wheel then changing the rear springs is more difficult than on my 4/4 with a spare wheel.

On my 4/4 with 80 section tyres, I don't get any interference between tyres and brake reaction bars.

As regards ride height, our 1985 CVH engined car didn't really have a speed bump ground clrearance issue. The gearbox cross member on my current 4/4 (Mazda gearbox) seems to be hitting things on an almost regular basis.

Having spent years under MGBs and Midgets, I can confirm that poor quaility MG leaf springs abounded, even as far back as the 1980s. I bought my first leaf springs from the main dealer back in 1971. They were around £5 each. They had interleaving, and the keeps were complex two piece pressings secured to each other using bent over tabs, but also having nylon 'gaskets' which went around the spring first. Location was by a metal blob on the spring. Before long the interleaving vanished and so did those keeps. They were replaced by crude single rivet strips of steel which were hammered around and over the spring. They were rubbish and quickly sagged. The parabolics quickly got a reputation for sagging and going S shaped, especially with V8 power. Maybe that's improved now.

I was fortunate in the eighties to audit a Sheffield spring maker who had huge contracts with major companies for valve springs and so on. I was able to discuss MG springs and they produced the drawings of the original spec springs under contract to MG/Austin Morris/BMC or whatever. The steel specification was absolutely specific and therein lies the rub. A steel leaf spring can't be judged by appearance. Morgan springs are the same. When I replaced my Roadster springs I went for a reputable supplier, but there was no interleaving and the keeps were still the crude MGB variety. On recommendation I stripped the springs down and removed the lumps and bumps. I then added Tribo Tape, greased between and reassembled, then added leather gaiters in the best vintage tradition. Ride height, even with 4 seater springs is marginally lower than the six leaf originals but the ride was transformed. I had the same experience after changing the rear springs on my 2012, which DID have the rubbish quality rear springs. It was chalk and cheese. But the modern marketing approach is to keep prices down and in doing that you won't get lasting quality. That's the mistake that Morgan made in 2010/11.

No thanks necessary, I enjoy intelligent debate, Frankly, I learn more from those with fewer prior planted misconceptions. Trad Morgans are very different from other cars. It is all due to the use of a vintage flexing frame, which has advantages for everyone save cookie cutter profit makers. That is precisely why this world tells us that stiff chassis are the ultimate IMHO.


Of course. Bad leaf springs degrade any trad a lot!. though I am far more familiar with 2 seaters than 4. 4 seaters are pretty touring cars. Button and I learned about them together. We couldn't figure a way to set up their suspension, money being no object. If you made them perfect for two, it they were not good for 4 passengers and vice versa. He final turned his into a 2 seater with a huge amount of storage space. That being said, 4 in a Morgan looks like it a blast. Snowmobiles have a way of changing leaf springs frimness. It can be used with Morgans. See below.


Frustrating.

1. Your adjustment is only good at the time you first fit them. What you are doing now is either very little or counter productive. Adjustability is an inventorying thing. Morgan dampers arrive in the setting (normally the least firm) that the manufacturer has determined is the best for Morgan. The best rates are from Morgan specialists, like Tim and Cain. Shocks made by others are a hope and prayer...and they too do not give out their rates. ( I found KONIs fine..luck) All sellers say theirs are for Morgans. They even often give "Morgan" model numbers, but they are made for many cars. Compromises are not ideal with your hobby.

2. Once again, damper settings have little if anything to do with the problems you are saddened by. As I noted on another thread, sagged or not, the leaf spring rate does not change. You merely bottom out (ouch!) very frequently because of the sagging biases the ideal ride height. So changing those oscillation by changing your damper setting (assuming it had any effect) makes you ride LESS comfortable. And too stiff a suspension has you bouncing down the road from painful impact to painful impact. Wryly speaking, cars handle, perform and speed their best when their wheels are on the ground rather than bouncing above it.

3. Dampers are supposed to change the spring created oscillations to something humans find comfortable. Read up on oscillations and dampers. Here is a start https://www.toc.edu.my/automotiveandmotorsports-hub/2011/suspension-bible


Smart man. A perfect example of trial and error. No theory needed. I began with performance snowmobiles. You learned a lot from motorcycles! Trial and error is bullet proof.


No. But we can work it out. Pictures? We will merely analyze what's happening and make your own or I can have a Morgan professional make them for you.


Can you not have the sump modified a la Peter Mulberry and the Roadsters? Or better still, are their steel sumps made for your model of engine? I have 3.4" clearance by I have two steel LR sumps. When one gets banged in, I switch to the other sump and bang out the dented one at my leisure. Alloy sumps give me the creeps. They shatter rather than dent and protecting them with a plate shortens the clearance even more!.


That is sad but accurate, Paul. But it happened with one leaf spring supplier after another. I have a theory.


Good to know. But it is also costless to make brake reaction bars to suit.


Different designers and leaf springs.

BTW gentlemen, all of this is curable though I made some codicils about the source of leaf springs.

gmg

I'm running big fat 195/65 x 15's on the front of my 1972 4/4, and have not noticed an issue with the BRBs (which I fitted with the original wheel/tyre combo)

Changed my rear springs a few years back and fitted some BCC 5 leaf springs on the recommendation of Peter Ballard (SSL). Great improvement. Also fitted his uprated adjustable armstrong valves, and made some bumpstops from a design he sketched for me. Along wth the panhard, it massively improved the handling and ride quality.

You can see the difference in springs in this photo



Here's the bumpstops:

Good work TBM

I realise that the subject of suspension upgrades has been covered in various threads but I would appreciate if anyone who has fitted a Plus 8 with the Suplex front suspension would mind sharing their experience.