TigersUnited EDITORS NOTE:
This section has not been organized and edited at this point.
There are over 300 pages of collected List E-Mails to be edited and coded, and we did not want to hold up the TigersUnited Site release until everything was 100%. Consequently, some sections are NOT in the shape we finally intend.
If our search engine is operable, you will be able to find any specific information you will need. These pages will be replaced with edit sections, with proper Table of Contents and hot-links, as the become available from our overloaded section editors.
Please bear with us on these 'roll-out' challenges.
These entries were collected, over a three year period, for my personal use, they reflect my own choices as to what I kept for my possible future needs. My name appears far too often due to this fact. Please accept the value it may contain, in spite of what might appear to be too many repetitions of my own questions and answers.
Steve L
The comments contained herein are the sole opinions of the contributors, and should be used with appropriate consideration of possible errors of omission, commission, or lack of sufficient information.
Section Editor - AWAITING VOLUNTEER TO ORGANIZE AND COMBINE.
Section H - Front Suspension
Page 1
Subject: Re: Shocking Tales
Date: Sun, 4 Aug 1996 09:19:12 -0400
From: CMeinel464@aol.com
To: Steve Laifman
Steve,
I'm surprised that the car would bottom out with only 44K on the Speedo. I would guess, since Jay said the shocks were black, that you have the OEM Armstongs in the rear. Yes, a lot of customers use the adjusting features of the Koni's and Spax when the auto-x or race. As I told Jay, I have both the Spax (Series V, Alpine) and Koni (Tiger1a) on my cars. I like the Spax for I can (don’t do it often) change the rating of the shock, then change it back. Since this can be done without removing the shock, it's not a pain. I have not seen any problem or premature wear, but I must admit I only put about 500-750 miles on each car in the summers. I was not aware that KYB had a true match for the Alpine/Tiger, I was under the impression (have KYB wholesale catalog) that it's another (THIS SHOCK WILL WORK) tech tip thing. If you know the numbers, give them to me and I'll talk to my KYB rep. Koni did make an announcement for gas, but in their current catalog only list the hydraulic for the Alpine/Tiger. They make us buy a minimum of 10 of each shock now, since the Tiger is considered special order. Have both Koni and Spax in stock when the time comes.
Hope I've helped, Regards,
Curt Classic Sunbeam
Subject: FWD: Re: Re: Koni/Spax/KYB/Monroe
Date: 06 Aug 96 12:24:05 EDT
From: Jay Laifman <JLAIFMAN@pnm.mhs.compuserve.com>
To: Steve Laifman
FORWARDED MESSAGE from Gary A Winblad (MAIL@CSERVE {INTERNET:gary_winblad@juno.com}) at 8/6/96
To: JLAIFMAN@PNM.MHS.CompuServe.COM
Date: Mon, 5 Aug 1996 21:58:00 PST
Subject: Re: Koni/Spax/KYB/
From: gary_winblad@juno.com (Gary A Winblad)
Yeah, what THEY carry is Koni and Spax.. that must be why I bought them! Got them from Rick. He suggested full soft on the back and half up on the front (7 clicks). I'm now at about half on the back and 5 clicks (soft) on the front... with full soft on the back the rear end bobbed around so much you could feel the gas pedal going up and down.. and that was just on a smooth freeway. Let us all know what your dad decides on.
Gary
On 05 Aug 96 13:23:38 EDT
Jay Laifman JLAIFMAN@PNM.MHS.CompuServe.COM
writes:
>Gary,
>
> I don't know much about these KYB's. My dad put them on the kit car
> we built years ago. They are a gas shock and come compressed with a
> strap around them that can only be taken off slowly once the shock it
> mounted. I called them when I needed shocks for my Alpine. They
> had a set listed for the Tiger. After getting the specs, I was pretty sure
..> that the front ones would not compress far enough for the front travel.
>But, the rears fit fine and are a fraction of the Koni/Spax price.
>
..> Someone did e-mail me and suggest against KYB's, but gave no reason
> (they also offered to sell me what they do carry: Spax and Koni).
> >I also got blue Monroes on my Alpine. I got the ones listed in the
>CAT Shop Notes. I have not noticed that they are too stiff. I also got
>the front ones listed in the Notes. I think they are too soft actually.
>But, both are under $20 each. So, I figured I could live with them
>for a while.
>
>Jay Laifman
Subject: RE: Scare Tactics
Date: Tue, 06 Aug 96 11:11:00 PDT
From: "Spontelli, Ramon" <rs11@elsegundoca.ncr.com>
To: tigers list
.> Inquiring minds want to know.
We've been autocrossing a Mk II for almost ten years now. Two drivers, competing in two SCCA regional championship series, plus an occasional club or non-SCCA event, averaging twenty to thirty events a year. Our car gets used a lot. We are currently running 225-45x15 Hoosiers on 8-inch wheels. We use C.A.T. springs, with Konis at full-stiff in the front, a 1-inch sway bar, and plastic bushings throughout. We have never had a ball joint failure, and we've never broken a fulcrum pin, though we did upgrade to stronger pins when we redid the front-end a couple of years ago because the mounts for the lower a-arm were ripping themselves off the crossmember on one side. In all, our most common failure has involved the sway bar brackets. This, however, should not be taken as a mitigation of the fulcrum pin problem. I've heard and read of many broken pins. I saw one snap about six feet from me when Peter Phelps was backing out of a parking space at Tigers United in Santa Rosa a while back, and Chuck Daly broke one on the way to a get-together at Ed & Karen Foster's a couple of years ago. Yep, they break. Yep, you are at risk driving out of your driveway. This probably scares some people. It scares me too. But if and when the level of my fear surpasses the intensity of my thrill, I'll park it and maybe learn how the play the-wax-and polish game.
<ok. Maybe NOT!>
Ramon
Subject: Potential Suspension Defects, the Big Picture.
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 22:11:38 -0700 (PDT)
From: Tom Hall <Modtiger@engravers.com>
To: Tigers List
CC: "Paul Burr" tigerpb@ids.net
Abstract: In the interest of overall safety in the Tiger Marque, the following technical information related to suspension component failures is submitted. Permission is granted in advance to club editors to reproduce all, or excerpts from this document.
From some of the responses received, I may have done a poor job of explaining myself in my first post on the subject of Tiger suspension component failures, and maybe I jumped on Paul harder than I should have, for that I apologize. I do not condone and certainly did not mean in any way to imply that faulty components are acceptable or should be sold, particularly those related to safe operation of a vehicle.
As a small business owner, I guess I tend to get up tight when someone expresses the suggestion of suing someone before ever exploring the other options available.
One of the situations I was attempting to explain is that ALL Tiger owners have an increased risk with the lower pins (and other suspension components) because many of them have reached or exceeded the actual design life and the fatigue failure rate of these components is growing. We in STOA have not seen a mechanical failure problem related to the lower ball joints from Q-H. They may have other problems as are related later in this document, but total mechanical failure has not been seen. The basic fulcrum pin design problem was initiated by the Sunbeam, probably in the 50's. The problem pertains to the bolt notches placed in the fulcrum pins to locate the lower A-arms in relationship to the crossmember.
When Sunbeam created this design, I seriously doubt that they allowed for the stress loads placed by a high performance small block V-8 coupled with high performance tires. The fact that they have lasted as long as they have is perhaps a minor miracle.
The notches happen to occur at the points of maximum bending stress. The notching has the effect of producing local stress risers which amplify or multiply the stress in that area. Another stress riser occurs at the change in diameter or cross-section, where the bushing assemblies butt up against the larger central pin diameter.
These high stress areas are the two typical points of failure for these pins. The original (OEM) fulcrum pins began to fail and break due to possible over stress and fatigue cycle failures about 12 to 15 years ago. Rick and other suppliers had run out of OEM supplies about that time. Some new pins were obtained from Quinton-Hazel (Q-H) (a British manufacturer of ball joints and other suspension components). Several of the Q-H pins failed at the bolt reliefs within the first couple of years of service. As a Mechanical Engineer, when I saw the failed pins, the reason was obvious. Instead of milling the locating bolt reliefs onto the pins, the Q-H design had them turned in a lathe. This produced a significant reduction in cross section and a major increase in the stress riser effect.
Rick pulled what he had in stock and scrapped them. This was in about the 1983 to 1987 time frame. Reports of problems ended shortly thereafter and have been non-existant for over 7 years.
Rick did not have a computer data base at the time he sold these Q-H fulcrum pins, but is currently searching several thousand old invoice records by hand, to attempt to identify any unknown buyers and make them aware of this potential problem. He is also going to submit notices to the Tiger club newsletter editors to advise people how to identify the Q-H design fulcrum pins.
One of the interesting things about the failure of the fulcrum pins (regardless of manufacture) is that they have always broken at low speed, in fact the most frequent breakage occurs when someone is backing up into a parking space, with the steering at its limits. I relate this failure mode to the increased forces of reverse travel with Toe and Ackerman settings. Most of the original suspension components including the ball joints, steering rack, and possibly Engineering Products in Clevedon, Somerset, England, originally manufactured the fulcrum pins. All of their parts were of fairly high quality but the company no longer exists. This means that the engineering drawings and specifications are no longer available as a starting point of reference to provide information on materials, manufacturing specifications and heat treatment requirements, which are critical to the pins service capability.
As a result, some manner of after market manufacture must be used. Rick contacted Moog ( a well known US manufacturer of suspension components) with a request to manufacture replacement lower ball joints. They refused to bid on this project explaining that tooling costs would be excessive. They recommended Q-H, their British counterpart. In a related safety question, Q-H denies the problems with their current lower ball joint design. They ship to Rick and other suppliers with a Nylock nut. Rick tosses this nut, drills a new hole and installs a castellated nut and cotter key. I had one of their Nylock nuts unscrew on my daughters Alpine, and drop an A-arm. Their current design eliminates the OEM original copper plating which prevented rust. Rusty ball joints tend to unscrew the nut with the spindle. If you don't have cotter keys on your lower ball joints, I'd advise you to drill the studs and install them. I also recommend marine grease in the Q-H ball joints. The extra rust inhibitors in the marine grease will help prevent rust and should increase ball joint life.
A more recent problem has occurred with upper ball joints. Most of the replacement ball joints sold since the OEM inventory was used up have been manufactured by Q-H. These ball joints are a press fit into the upper A-arm, with a circlip to prevent them from popping back out. The Q-H upper ball joints were manufactured with approximately a 0.015" increased OD to insure a tight press fit.
The Q-H upper joints are no longer available, and the only supplier is Sidem of Belgium. Unfortunately, Their design only provides 0.004" OD increase over the OEM design. This may result in an excessively loose fit if the new Sidem ball joints are used to replace Q-H joints. The Sidem joints should only be used to replace OEM ball joints.
Q-H has demanded a minimum order quantity of 1,000 ball joints to initiate remanufacture, which makes the potential unit price prohibitive.
Because of my own personal technical interest, I attempted to have several of the OEM suspension components tested by a metallurgist associated with a fastener manufacturer of U.S. national reputation. This occurred shortly after SUNI I. The intent was to identify as much as possible the alloys and heat treatment used by the OEM for these components. Three years later, due essentially to politics and bad feelings associated with the development and creation of SUNI II, the package of components was returned, untouched. This kind of testing work is expensive, but I feel that it is necessary as a starting point to the development of any replacement design. From that point, the design process has to address all of the known problems to assure that its at least as good as the OEM part and I feel that it should be further refined to make it "better" to account for the currently anticipated loading in the Tiger application.
I have had many discussions related to this design process and the responses always come down in two groups. The first group won't accept anything different than the "stock" design, 'cause that's their orientation. The second group wants to minimize or eliminate the OEM problems and use modern materials including urethane bushings, and currently available ball joints to enhance the "total" design, an perhaps make it more roadworthy. I have my own preliminary concepts for designs to meet these two diverse objectives. To cover the "stock" design, and protect against the effects of sudden failure, the two stamped retainers on each A-arm would be replaced with a single U shaped channel running the full length of the major diameter of the pin. The inside of the U would be a snug fit for the pin diameter and the bolts would pass through holes in the walls. This would serve three purposes. First it replaces the relatively weak retainer stampings with a stronger component. Second, the channel provides mechanical support for the fulcrum pin and spreads the load out to reduce stresses. And finally, the channel provides a capture function in that if the fulcrum pin breaks in the bolt relief area, it is retained in position by the channel. This design provides no protection for the second known failure point, and will probably increase the stress at the change in diameter at the bushing surfaces. But it does fit the "stock" system.
The second concept involves replacing the fulcrum pin with a piece of substantially larger cross section, primarily a rectangular bar with the four mounting holes to attach it to the crossmember. Because this new pin cross section exceeds the diameter of the bushing holes in the A-arms, it would seem most appropriate to use "bolts" from the outside of each bushing threaded into axial holes in the new center bar. The larger cross section would be sufficient to negate the stress risers at the four mounting holes, and the "bolts" could be custom sized to provide more strength, and allow the adaptation of urethane bushings. This is where a significant level of agreement and funding is needed. Considering the combined resources of the 5 to 10 individuals, (manufacturers?) who make up the entire "Sunbeam Replacement Industry", I don't see this happening anytime soon without financial underwriting help from the clubs. I certainly sympathize with Paul's anger and financial loss, but many more of you could well experience the same problem or worse, if something isn't done to arrest these growing problems.
Tom Hall, modtiger@engravers.com
STOA (Sunbeam Tiger Owners Association)
Subject: MG MIGET RACK
Date: Sun, 4 Jan 1998 22:28:58 +1100 (EST)
From: Wally Menke <wallym@ozemail.com.au>
To: Tigers List >
Date: Sat, 27 Dec 1997 13:12:45 >
To: Tiger List >
From: Bob Palmer <rpalmer@ames.ucsd.edu> >
Subject: MG MIGET RACK
>Steve,
> This is the setup I've had on my car for the past four years....
>Dale will modify a cross member to accept the MG Midget rack
.> which is better than the Tiger rack.....
>
> Regards,
> Bob
Dear Bob Is there any further information on the fitting up of a MG Midget steering rack??, if so I'd like to know??
Seasons Greetings to all!
Cheers Wally Menke
Subject: Re: Tiger ID manual
Date: Sat, 24 Jan 1998 22:22:46 EST
From: MWood24020 <MWood24020@aol.com>
To: larry@netkonnect.net
Larry-
I am more than willing to give you my opinion on what works as far as Tiger suspension set-up goes. Please know, I am not an expert. All I can relate is what I have done, what worked, and what others have been pleased with. Also, if you are in touch with Dale, you already are in tune with advice of a magnitude greater than what I can bring to the table.
Springs- I have already thrown out to the list what I did about rear springs (extra leaf, free in the back). For front springs, I run a CAT equivalent which I bought from Sunbeam Specialties. We cut them about 3/4 of a coil and still run the rubber isolators. My ride height is only 3/4 to 1" lower than stock. To low and you end up spending too much time on the bumpstops. Of course, good shocks. I use Konis.
Front Sway Bar- There are kind of two schools of thought: Run big bars and softer springs or run stock bars and stiffer springs. I haven't felt the need to go more than 1/8" increase in front and run urethane bushings.
Rear Sway Bar- I don't run one. I used to, but felt, at least with the bolt on design, two bad things happened. 1. The cars already have a tendency to rear wheel steer and I felt that the bar made it worse. 2. I wanted the back end "softer" for more neutral handling. I suppose that if I ran a huge front bar I would need an adjustable rear bar. Panhard Rod- I still use mine, because I haven't made the jump to a Torque Arm. Also, I was actively campaigning in our area's semi-pro autocross series (AAS) and was able to run F stock with my existing setup and beat up on Camaro 1LE's and Mustang Cobras. Ultimately, I think junking the factory panhard rod and running a Torque Arm and Watts link would be the best.
Traction Masters- I run bolt-ons, which work better than the weld-ons. They are cleaner and transfer the load to where it can do more good. I have also seen some trick one-offs which were over-riders, running on top of the springs, but I don't know how well they work. Of course, use of a Torque Arm makes this all irrelevant!
Torque Arm- ABSOLUTELY! I have driven Tigers and Mustangs equipped with this set up and it is awesome. Not only is traction enhanced, it also helps quite a bit with brake dive, which is something which really bugs me with my current Tiger.
Quad Shocks- Why? The first thing you do when you install a Torque Arm on a Mustang is dump the quad shocks...I really don't know.
Wheels- I think 14" makes sense, 15"s and low profile rim protectors look kind of funny on a Tiger, in my opinion. 14X6.5 and 14X7.5 running BF Goodrich Comp TA R1's would work fine. Tire size will depend on whether you want to roll the fender lips, backspacing etc. Panasports and Minilites look period correct and can be custom ordered for fitment.
Other Mods- Tom Hall has been talking to me about tubular crossmembers, tubular A-arms, coil over shocks etc. in a Tiger application which would be real cool and do-able.
I hope this helps,
Mike Wood B382002273
Subject: Re: Tiger ID manual
Date: Sun, 25 Jan 1998 15:39:14 EST
From: MWood24020 <MWood24020@aol.com> Organization: AOL (http://www.aol.com)
To: larry@netkonnect.net
CC: Tigers List
Larry-
The posts on the rear springs I use were recent.
To summarize: I took Alpine springs, took them apart and re-arced them in Tom Hall's backyard to lower the rear about 1", added another second leaf (which requires grinding the tabs off the leaf you are laying the second on), and left them unclamped behind the rear end to aid load transfer to the front. I also use bolt-on Traction Masters, which were built by Keith Queen. While this certainly is not a high tech solution, I've been very pleased with the results.
Dan Walters (who, since I take it you are a member of CAT, you probably know or have access to his phone number) makes Torque Arms. You could fabricate one yourself. Basically, all that is being done is connecting the center section of the rear end with the X-member of the uni-body. Dan uses round section tubing, I have also seen them made with rectangular section. The connection to the center section is very straightforward, typically using the bolts of the differential cover to effect a solid mount. The connection to the X-member is more complex, in that you have to provide for movement. Probably best to order one up from Dan.
Mike Wood B382002273
At 08:04 AM 1/28/98 -0800, you wrote:
>Larry,
>
>I've got a set from Dale (I won't attempt the last name this time),
.> PH: 909 >799 2099.
> They were recommended by Gary W. and others. I hear they are
>originally for some mini-truck application. They look like maybe a leaf
>was removed to turn them into Tiger springs, not sure. Dale lists the
>spring rate at 190 PPI, I don't know how this compares to stock. They have
>a lable with the "Betts" brand name and "made in the USA". They are
>advertised as new, not rebuilt. The locating pin on the spring is larger
>than the one on the spring pad on the rear end so the holes on the spring
>pads will need to be enlarged (drilled). The spring leafs are about 1/4"
>narrower than the stock Tiger springs and I am still contemplating if/how
>to add spacers to take up the slack. Dales springs use a small bushing
>(included) at each eye. At $190, Dales springs are probably a little
>cheaper than completely rebuilding a stock set. I can't comment on ride or
>performance yet.
> >At 06:57 AM 1/28/98 -0500, Larry Wright wrote:
>>Charlie Nichols wrote:
>>I ordered a set of rear springs from VB
>>That stands for Very Bad, right?
>>Now, every time I get a VB catalog, I look through it to see if there's
>>anything I want to get _from_somewhere_else_, and then throw it out.
>> >>Sounds like rebuilding what's currently under the car is my best bet.
.. >>
>>Lawrence R. Wright
>>Purchasing Analyst >>Andrews Office Products, Divison of USOP
>>PH 301-386-7923 FX 301-386-5333
>>lrw@aop.com >
>
> >Frank Marrone MK I Tiger B9471116
>marrone@wco.com
'97 Crown Vic LX
> Yamaha Seca 900 (aka XJ900RK)
> '79 Spitfire > '66 Ford LTD
> '88 Nissan 4WD p'up
> > > Bob Palmer UCSD, AMES Dept. rpalmer@ames.ucsd.edu
Subject: Re: Rear springs
Date: Wed, 28 Jan 1998 10:43:32 -0800
From: brockctella@juno.com (Brock C Tella)
To: CEJLNCAR@aol.com
CC: Tigers List
References: 1
Subject: Tiger suspension
Date: Wed, 28 Jan 1998 21:27:24 -0800
From: Bob Palmer <rpalmerbob@email.msn.com>
To: Tigers List
Guys, I tried to post this a few days back, but was not quite up to speed with Microsoft Outlook versus Outlook Express and other arcane aspects of the Win95, etc. protocols. Anyway, here's a few of my comments regarding the subject of Tiger Suspension:
Pardon me if I re-name this thread as I don't think we're talking about the Tiger ID manual any more ( at least for the time being). Anyway, having tried a lot of different setups over the years I have a few comments to add to the already extensive comments on this topic.
First of all, I've come to the opinion that the place to start with controlling suspension is with SPRINGS. Dick Guldstrand and others with a lot more experience than any of us have the philosophy that springs are the primary way to control suspension travel and roll stiffness, NOT sway bars. The purpose of a sway bar within this philosophy is to fine tune roll stiffness. Accordingly, use BIG springs and a small sway bar up front. By BIG springs I mean at least 400 #/in. Depending on a variety of factors, including your relationship with your chiropractor, you may want to go to 450 or even 500 #/in. The 400-450 range is still reasonable for the street, again depending on your personal tastes. I am using 425 #/in and use a 7/8" sway bar (3/4" is stock and went with very weak stock springs).
Recently, I have found a cheap and easy way to adjust front stiffness. Buy a set of the rubber coil spring helpers from Pep Boys, etc., for about $5 and add them to the front springs to increase stiffness. Changes ride height scarcely at all and allows easy installation and removal to adjust for street versus autocross (in for street, out for autocross). The problem with using a big stiff sway bar (front or back) is that it takes the "independent" out of you independent suspension. Granted, with a big stiff sway bar you won't lean in the turns (good), but now both wheels are essentially tied together and go up and down as a unit instead of independently following the contour of the road/track. If you have soft springs and the car wallows like a Buick, then after adding a big sway bar, it will still wallow; just straight up and down. Now 400-500 #/in springs might seem kind of stiff, but if you are running a track at high speed (>100 mph) and hit even a fairly small bump the compression of your suspension will be considerable if not controlled by rather stiff springs.
I think the principle here is to try and keep as many wheels on the ground for as much of the time as possible, which independent suspension does best. I advise not to use 330#/in (CAT) springs because they are too weak for autocross etc., they sag, and other reasons I could mention. Go to Coil Spring Specialties, Dale's Restorations, or other good source and get a set of top quality springs. I think the cost is still not much over $100 bucks for a pair.
Now on to the rear suspension: The key here is to match it to the front suspension. It's harder to adjust the rear roll stiffness directly if you don't have an adjustable sway bar. This would be the only valid reason, in my opinion, to install one. Most people like to set up their suspension with a lot more roll stiffness up front because it gives them a more predictable feel. Basically, with soft rear springs, the rear end just follows the car around. However, if you want more cornering capability out of your car, increase the rear springs and/or sway bar stiffness relative to the front. Guys who race Porches complain bitterly about the car's tendency to oversteer, but they do win!!
A really neutral handling car is a bit scary. Where to set the balance is a matter of what your are willing to cope with and how good your reflexes are. I think about two more leaves added to the stock rear springs is more-or-less about right, but you will have to play around and, again, the rear setup depends on how stiff you are up front (sounds like the basis for a bumper sticker). I could get into the issue of roll steer in the back, but will defer this topic to a later date. Regarding the torque arm: A lot of folks out there like this approach. Bolt-on traction bars have been a very good option and have the advantage of being "stock" on a Tiger. My problem with the torque arm is that, contrary to what you suggest, it adds to the tendency of the front end to dive during braking. If you read Dan's tech notes he alludes to this fact and the related tendency for the rear end to lose traction in reverse gear.
Also, I don't see any relationship between the torque arm and the Panhard rod or Watts link. The torque arm does nothing I can see to limit side-to-side motion of the axle. I've tried mine with and without the Panhard rod and prefer it without. Can't really explain why, but it just feels better without it. I know Dale tried a really nifty Watts link on his vintage racer and took it off immediately after he tried it. He can't explain it either, but then hardly any of us take the time to research these issues. With the torque arm, or any other nifty new gadget, there's a tendency to view it as a "magic bullet" that's going to solve all our problems. Truth is, success is more a matter of getting all the parts to work together which involves a fair amount of good engineering, trial-and-error, and just plain hard work.
Now, I have a question for you. Can you please tell me a little more about the "over-riders running on top of the springs"? I've been thinking about something along these lines and would like to know how it is implemented in some other vehicles.
Thanks.
Bob Palmer B9472134, SHO, etc.
Subject: Re: Tiger suspension
Date: Thu, 29 Jan 1998 07:10:51 -0800 (PST)
From: Bill Martin <bmartin@kibo.Stanford.EDU>
To: Bob Palmer rpalmerbob@email.msn.com
CC: Tigers List
Bob,
I am running a set of cut off Tiger main springs on the top of my rear (Larry Atkisson) springs. I have them going toward the rear and clamped at the end. Works pretty good as I put down about 100ft of dual black patches the other day when it was not raining. The car jumped a little at first then settled down nicely. I am going to try flipping the springs over so they are not captured. I have also rebuilt the front calipers and spindles, I’m running the Repco pads and they feel real nice. Thanks for the tip. I also tried a rear sway bar and did not like it.
Bill Martin B9470735
Subject: Re: Tiger Steering Dimensions???
Date: Thu, 29 Jan 1998 07:35:55 -0800 (PST)
From: Bill Martin <bmartin@kibo.Stanford.EDU>
To: DrMayf <DrMayf@aol.com>
CC: Tigers List
Hello again,
I really should drink more coffee before writing in the morning. I forgot to mention that the MGB arms are longer than Tiger arms by about 3/4 of an inch which delivers much more leverage. Bill
Subject: steering 101
Date: Thu, 29 Jan 1998 13:08:11 -0800 (PST)
From: Bill Martin <bmartin@kibo.Stanford.EDU>
To: Larry Paulick larry@netkonnect.net
CC: Tigers List
Larry and all,
Let me first state that I am by no means the guru of steering!!! My research consisted of talking the ears off of Norm Miller and Dr Bob Palmer, as some of you know Bob is fast and his car is awesome. I picked their brains and read every book on the Tiger in print. Norm was kind enough to show me detailed pictures of the #55 cars front and rear suspension. (Norm has pictures of everything) I then picked up Mr. Carrol Smiths books, Drive to win, Tune to Win, Build to Win, Engineer to Win. Needless to say I like to do a small amount of research before I do a modification.
The above mentioned books will give any reader with an interest a better understanding of how the suspension and steering work. The problem with a Tigers steering is the negative Ackerman effect built into the steering, the rack is mounted to far forward of the centerline of the steering arms. If you look you will see that the track arms are bent back toward the wheels. (this is not a good thing)
It follows that Sunbeam had to make short steering arms to get everything to fit with the small 13" dia wheels. Doan Spencer built the Hollywood Sportscars Tiger for Sunbeam and the way he got the car to steer was to move the rack back an flip the rotors on the stub axle carrier, he also straightened the track rods coming out of the rack, and used alpine steering arms (which are the same length as MGB arms).
With all this they decreased the Ackerman effect and reduced the steering effort because the tires where turning closer to concentric circles. What I have done is fit MGB steering arms on my car, MGB arms need to be bent up to the same angle as a Tiger steering arm. They also need to be bent toward the rotor (or out) as far as you can go (there is a limit) with a tie rod end installed so as to not contact the rotor, dust cover or inner rim edge. Your individual rim backspacing will determine the amount of negative Ackerman that you can correct. To fit them you will need a pair of MGB arms (20 bucks wrecking yard) longer bolts 4 ( the rear mounting location over the upper caliper is thicker than stock Tiger) and you will need two spacers the same thickness as the caliper mount. A torch and a friend who knows how to bend metal. I would advise getting the arms Magnafluxed after bending.
Completely correcting the Ackerman to neutral cannot be done to a Tiger front crossmember in stock form nor is it necessary or desired.
Sorry about the length of this post. Hope it was of some help
Bill Martin B9470735
On Thu, 29 Jan 1998, Larry Paulick wrote:
..>Bill, interesting concept. Would you like to post a complete how-to
> story to this list? I know you would have many interested readers.
>
> Thanks
> Larry
> Ground-Up rest on B9271874
Subject: Tiger Steering, etc...
Date: Thu, 29 Jan 1998 20:20:46 EST
From: DrMayf@aol.com
To: Tigers List
First let me thank all who have replied to my post requesting steering dimensions. While I did not get the info requested, I did get some ancillary data. But, I still need the data:
What is the distance from a line drawn between the lower ball joints to the centerline of the mounted rack & pinion and what is the distance between the rack's ball sockets?
I need the data because I am too lazy to drag my Tiger out of storage and measure myself and it is a heck of a lot easier with the crossmember on the bench.
Now why do I want this info? I have owned my Cat for 31 years and in all of that time I have never seen an analysis of the Tigers steering problem. I have seen many fixes come and go and they all seem to be trial and error. I want to understand the problem first and then to solve the problem as best it can be solved analytically. I will post this analysis as I go along.
I am also building an ET Bracket racer from a rust bucket SV Alpine. So I have all of the basic components to implement the fix and to report on the effort, again as I go along. I may even have to build a new crossmember to fix it!
Now, I have preliminarily made the first step in the analysis: that is to determine the correct Ackerman angles for our cars. This is pretty simple trig based on the following conditions:
1) the correct steering arm angle for proper Ackerman is that it must lie on a line drawn from the center of the car at the rear axle centerline through the lower ball joint.
2) With wheelbase dimensions of 86 inches and distance between the ball joints, the correct steering angle arm is 14.667 degrees, splayed to the outside.
3) Given this then the following is easily found:
| Inside Wheel turn Angle |
Outside Wheel Turn Angle |
| 5 degrees |
4.78 degrees |
| 10 degrees |
9.17 degrees |
| 15 degrees |
13.22 degrees |
| 20 degrees |
17.00 degrees |
| 25 degrees |
20.55 degrees |
| 30 degrees |
23.91 degrees |
This basic analysis is predicated on Dave Morgan's Chassis builder book. As soon as I get more info, I'll do more and let you all know how it is progressing...
Thanks,
Larry Mayfield
Subject: More Steering Stuff
Date: Sun, 08 Feb 1998 12:13:58 -0500
From: Will Seay <wseay@sprynet.com>
To: Tiger Mailing List
OK guys (&gals?)
I've finally gotten back to you on the Ackerman angle steering thing. For those of you who know the whole story of the Lou Anderson Ackerman "kit", you need read no further. I, for one, don't know the whole story and would like to be filled in. The following is what I know of the development of this thing.
It all started in August of ‘73 (a bit earlier than the ‘80's as I first estimated). Lou Anderson wrote a Shopnote for the August edition of CAT's Tiger Tales. In the article, Lou explained that the Tiger had a steering tracking problem which was the result of the forward-placement of the steering rack. With this placement the wheels do not toe out with increasing steering lock as they should.
The Shopnote included drawings illustrating the turning radius represented by each wheel and demonstrated that the radii did not converge unless the wheels toe out. Lou's solution was to add a pivot arm to the steering linkage. Sorry I can't illustrate it here. The pivot arm attached to the lower A-frame and resulted in adding a "kink", as Lou described it, to the linkage.
The result of the "kink" was to make the amount that the linkage extended increase as steering lock was added. This resulted in the tires' towing out with increasing steering lock. Lou had implemented this modification in his Tiger and was checking to see if there were other Tiger owners interested in making the same mod. Lou was understandably concerned because of the safety issues associated with a steering modification. He also warned that once the mod was started there was no turning back.
That was the beginning. It's my opinion that Lou's approach should work, if properly implemented. It's also my opinion that this is a complex modification and that opportunities for screwing up the implementation abound. In rummaging through my tiger Tales I found what appeared to be a sequel the original Shopnote.
Read on
... In the February ‘77 Tiger Tales (Geez, this was nearly four years later!) CAT was drumming up interest in producing the Lou Anderson Ackerman "kit". Lou had been successfully campaigning his Tiger in local autocrosses since ‘73, so CAT assumed that the safety of the modification had been demonstrated. The "kit" would be a bolt-on, requiring no welding, but requiring cutting, drilling, and threading were required. That's about all I know about the Lou Anderson Ackerman "kit". Apparently CAT did create and sell the "kit", and it is the "kit" about which there are such strong feelings. If anyone can complete the story and/or give testimonials (pro or con) for the "kit", I would like to hear from him.
-- B382001570 - Will Seay - wseay@sprynet.com
Subject: Re: More Steering Stuff
Date: Mon, 09 Feb 1998 09:20:46 -0500
From: Ray Bridenbaugh <briden@norcross.mcs.slb.com>
To: Tigers List
Hello Everyone,
I am curious about the reliability issue with this kit. As I have posted before, I know of a Tiger with this kit installed. Never had any problem. In fact it ran for nearly five years in SCCA Solo II, local competition, without ill effect. Also, the car took an exit on the freeway (with no exit ramp)at high speed when the right front lower ball joint broke. This resulted in only minor damage to the car (fixed) and had no damage to the kit components. But just the same, this is only one car. Have other cars had trouble with this kit?
Regards,
Ray B
Subject: Re: Fulcrum pins
Date: Thu, 12 Feb 1998 11:47:58
From: Bob Palmer <rpalmer@ames.ucsd.edu>
To: Steve Laifman
CC: Tigers List
References: 1
Gang,
I have lower fulcrum pins engineered by Dale Akuszewski, a.k.a., Dale's Restorations. They are built by Global West and they are REALLY BIG!!. They have Delrin bushings and zerk fittings, etc. Quite a few Tigers have these units and I haven't heard of any problems, although perhaps with the upper pins I heard a suggestion of a problem but don't know anything about it. I am using the earlier Alpine upper A-arms with solid bushings and bolt-on ball joints.
Pay Dale for these parts and let him worry about liability!! Just my two cents worth.
Bob, B9472134, SHO, etc.
At 11:20 AM 2/12/98 +0000, you wrote:
>Richard,
>
>No, I only write like a lawyer. I'm a Rocket Scientist (no kidding).
>It's my son, Jay, who is the attorney. His specialty is real estate and
>contracts. My brother-in-law's firm is Patents and Copyrights. You're
>looking for Consumer Protection, Product Liability, etc. experts. My own
>cut would be: if you sell a product, intended for a specific use, it had
>better be "suitable" for that use or you're in for it.
>
>Steve Laifman, B9472289
> Bob Palmer UCSD, AMES Dept. rpalmer@ames.ucsd.edu
Subject: Re: [Fwd: Shear force of Graded bolts]
Date: Thu, 12 Feb 1998 14:25:00 -0800
From: "Smith, Hal S. TITAN" <The Aerospace Corporation>
To: Steve Laifman
(Personal Note: Dr. Smith is a colleague in our Organization, and has rendered an opinion on I question I forwarded to him. This is his personal opinion, and not any Corporate statement. Steve)
Steve:
Replacing the bolts is just my innate conservatism. If the eccentric sleeve is rigidly clamped so that all the shear is taken by the sleeve/bracket interface, you shouldn’t have to worry about fatigue in the bolt. If you have the torque value specified for the bolt/nut, with a good ME Handbook, you should be able to calculate the prestress level in the bolt and thus determine what grade of bolt is required. Another question is, whether or not the stock bolts have a ground surface for a precision fit in the sleeve/bracket? If so, a standard, unground, bolt may introduce a plethora of problems. The SAE bolts are several thou. undersize and the marketplace is flooded with counterfeits of dubious strength. You might have to go to an AN or NAS aircraft bolt [if you can find one]. Since I haven't owned a vehicle with rear semi-elliptics in 40 years, I never understood the theory behind traction bars and all of their geometrical implications. Is it possible to install them above the springs without fouling the bodywork? Would this work? In any case, if the lowest point of the bars is still above the bottom of the differential housing, I wouldn't think you would have a clearance problem with speed bumps, etc. [Is it the front or the back of the bar that hits?] You might check Fred Puhn's book on chassis set-up for a discussion of this. I seem to remember that he goes into it in some detail.
Hal ----------
> From: Steve Laifman
> To: Smith, Hal S. TITAN
>
> Subject: Re: [Fwd: Shear force of Graded bolts]
> Date: Thursday, February 12, 1998 2:32AM
Hal,
The front bushing on the Tiger has an eccentric center tube so that it can be adjusted. Just an observation. I was going to change the springs because my Cobra race car driver/mechanic says they are sagging. I have found a new set of real factory springs, so figured I'd buy them rather than have a set built to uncertain standards. The bolt question was from others. I didn't think the bolts in mine needed replacing, and NEW Rootes bolts may be a little difficult, but the size is probably available new in any grade you care to have. I am sure the originals are not grade 8, although some of the P.O.'s replacements, elsewhere, are. If you think it's a good idea to replace a visually OK bolt, which grade would you recommend? BTW: I do get spring wind-up with the new 4 barrel, but didn't want the harsh ride the weld-on traction masters (factory stock option) give. There were some "bolt-on" factory Traction Masters. They U-bolt end was the same, but the front was attached to a clamp-on the front spring half. Some swear by it, others say it damages the spring. At least you don't have to weld. Another issue would be the ground clearance. With the current rear springs I can scrub the muffler on ramps and speed bumps (not as bad as a Big Healy). I ought to get more clearance (and ride height) from the new springs, but any traction master gives another low point to scrub. Any ideas? I added the Factory Option Edelbrock 4 Barrel F4B high rise and the Factory Option Holley 465 CFM 4 barrel with vacuum secondaries. Had a hell of a vibration in the motor between 900 to 1900 rpm, when it went away (or merged into other harmonics). After new front motor mounts I got some isolation. Installed Hall effect points and hot coil and MSD wires. The boots were long and straight. The mechanic cut about 3/8 inch of each tip so that the plug would connect with the wire connector. I was running with two spark gaps per cylinder, and it still went like a bat out of -. The rumble, clinking and clanking I was complaining about turned out to be a bad u joint and the drive shaft threw one of the weld on weights. Had it redone and it's smooth as a kitten. We increased the main primary jets about two Holley numbers (1 mil per number) and the 900-1900 rpm vibration is nearly gone. Had the distributor looked at. The stock advance didn't peak till 3800 rpm, even with the light weight Accel springs that came with the new vacuum canister. After a new curving on one of those old SUN machines, it is fully advanced at 1700 rpm. There is a 10 degree distributor mechanical slot limit (20 engine degrees), a 10 degree vacuum limit, and we set it a 6 degrees advance for a total of 36 degrees max. with all the ported vacuum on. Runs neat, doesn't ping on mid grade. Edelbrock (and a few others) are selling a neat gimmick. It's an oxygen sensor you mount in your exhaust (un-leaded only) and an LED read-out panel of Air/Fuel ratio. You can actually monitor your mixture under any driving condition, and figure out where it's too lean, or rich. Ordered one. Probably too many corrective adjustments are fixed orifices on the Holley, or if you fix it in one are, it goes out somewhere else. Anyway, it looked like a cute toy. Thanks for the conversation. Of all the things that went on at the Farm, I miss our lunch talks most of all. Steve P.S. Don't you dare retire without an e-mail capability at home. Internet, if possible. Netscape (now free) is a hell of a lot better the Microsoft.
Subject: Re: Hurst shifter / Koni shocks
Date: Thu, 2 Jul 1998 11:17:51 -0700
From: bobhorwitz@juno.com (Robert P Horwitz)
To: JStupar244@aol.com CC: Tigers List
References: 1
Koni fronts are 82-1347 and rears are 82-1348. I think you have to order at least 50 directly from Koni for them to make a special run. Don't know about Hurst.
On Thu, 2 Jul 1998 10:51:13 EDT JStupar244@aol.com writes:
>Doen anyone know the factory part numbers for the Hurst shifter and
>Koni >shocks.
>I work for a company that sells both brands, but can find no listing for a Tiger. >Thanks
>Jon >
Subject: Tie Rod Rubbers
Date: Thu, 6 Aug 1998 15:06:20 EDT
From: Phyrman5@aol.com
To: alpines list, Tigers List
As requested, I found what the part number for the tie rod end booties.
They are from a Jaguar (I don't remember which). The number on the invoice is: EAW2270 BOOT, TIE ROD END RUBBER I got them at Douds British Car Parts, Pasadena Ca. phone#626-793-2494 fax 626 793-4339 they were $8ea. and fit well. They don't look like the original, but they work.
Bruce D.
Subject: Fwd: Front end alignment
Date: Sun, 9 Aug 1998 13:34:48 EDT
From: MWood24020@aol.com
To: Tigers List
Subject: Re: Front end alignment
Date: Sun, 9 Aug 1998 13:33:54 EDT
From: MWood24020@aol.com
To: larisab@ix21.ix.netcom.com
In a message dated 98-08-09 11:29:30 EDT, you write:
<< Are the spec's for castor, camber, etc... the same for a Tiger as they are for an Alpine? If not? What are they? thank you in advance. >>
We didn't pay inordinate attention to the factory specs when aligning my Tiger last time, but went with numbers which were more conducive to performance. The set up has been: Camber -1.25~. Caster, as much as you can find reasonably, 3.75~. Toe 0-1/16 (kind of hard with the stock tie rod end set up, you either get 0 or 1/8 in or out). These settings have worn tires evenly (yes, even with the camber), made the car very autocross and open track friendly, and provided good straight line stability.
Mike Wood B382002273
Subject: Re: Front end alignment
Date: Sun, 09 Aug 1998 11:33:36 -0700
From: Bob Palmer <rpalmer@ames.ucsd.edu>
To: Alicia larisab@ix21.ix.netcom.com
CC: Tigers List
Alecia,
First off, forget about what the book says about the alignment specs. For example, they say that caster is NOT adjustable. Second, what is best for a particular car depends on how you drive it, tires and wheels, road conditions, etc.
Now, my advice is to adjust for the maximum caster you can get without too much camber, too much being a very subjective number. If you want to autocross, and cornering is paramount, then maybe too much is more than 2 degrees negative (some guys run even more!).
A better compromise would probably be in the range of 3/4 - 1.5 degrees negative. As for toe-in, I like just a smidgen (1/16 - 1/8) toed in. There are a number of Tiger people who insist on have their wheels toed out, but I don't buy it. The way the car feels does depend a lot on slight changes in toe setting, however, so you can play with this adjustment after getting the caster/camber set.
By the way, toe is the only adjustment that does NOT affect pulling to the left or right. If your car pulls to one side or the other, the most likely cause is too little caster on the side it is pulling toward. It will also pull to the side with less camber, but this is a less sensitive adjustment. You can do a pretty good job of alignment if you have a level floor and a few carpenter's tools. I use a set of trammel points on a straight 8' piece of 3/4" conduit to do the toe adjustment. Just the straight conduit can get you pretty close to straight ahead before you get down to the fine adjustments. Oh yes, when doing the toe adjustment start by setting the steering wheel pretty close to the middle of the range where it should also be square too. The adjust the front wheels to point straight ahead. This way, you will wind up with a proper adjustment of rack, steering wheel, and front wheels.
Have fun,
Bob At 11:29 AM 8/9/98 -0400, you wrote:
>Are the spec's for castor, camber, etc... the same for a Tiger as they are
>for an Alpine? If not? What are they? thank you in advance.
>Alicia
> > >Alicia & Dan
>Windsor, NY
> >B9471431
>B395017486LRX
>B395000648LRX >
Subject: Really! Rare option LAT 5-1/2 found
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1998 09:25:45 -0400
From: "Larry Wright" <lrw@aop.com>
To: <Tigers List>
I was getting the Garage Queen back down off the jackstands after reconnecting the exhaust (sounds much better now), and for the first time really _looked_ at my traction bars. I'd always said I had the bolt-on's and left it at that. Well, I had to pop open Norm's book to compare, what I saw didn't look right. The book shows clear pictures of the LAT 5, weld-on bars, and the LAT 6, bolt-on bars; way too different to confuse them. What I have must be LAT 5-1/2. They look exactly like the LAT 5's, attach to the frame, not he spring leaves. However, they are not welded on, they are secured by bolts through the L-shaped bracket, and then through the frame channel. The bolts are long and go all the way up to the top of the channel, thus tightening the bolts tries to compress the channel of the frame; doesn't look too strong but I guess it has held up for +/- 30 years. Anybody else have this set-up? I'll probably switch over to a DWTA anyway. Yesterday we drove down (non-Tiger) to Solomons, MD, to pick out a place to stay during United. The Holiday Inn is out on Route 2-4, right where the two roads split, actually outside of town a wee bit. Found one B&B 1/2-to-3/4 miles away, but right on Rt. 2; too noisy for an insomniac like me. So we're staying a full mile away in a nice Victorian on one of the few back streets in Solomons, and will probably _walk_ the distance twice a day rather than drag the car back and forth (unless they'll loan us the sailboat from their private dock, in which case we'll sail up). The other B&B's were more down towards the tip of the island, too far to walk, IMHO. Also, if you've never been there, the addition of the Rt. 4 bridge has resulted in some wacky traffic patterns, so it's a heads-up driving environment. Please be careful, let's not crumple any Rootes sheetmetal while there. We'll be sharing the town, BTW, with "Appreciation Days" some sort of craft festival. Ugh! If anyone on the 'committee' has a flyer or something, I have the address of the visitor's center and they said they would post it there; they already have a poster for another car show 9/20/98. Colin, even though your vegetable-patch post was a mite off-topic even for me, don't worry about the content police. Remember, you have a Delete key, too! :-) I also don't have a prob with the dissertations on heat transfer, so post away, guys. If nothing else, this thread puts "this is the final word because I'm an expert on the subject" type pronouncements in a whole new light. :-) Nah, this type of discussion could add valuably to our knowledge of a key Tiger subject.
Lawrence R. Wright Purchasing Analyst Andrews Office Products, Division of USOP PH 301-386-7923 FX 301-386-5333 lrw@aop.com
Subject: Re: Alignment
Date: Fri, 04 Sep 1998 06:53:26 -0700
From: Bob Palmer <rpalmer@ames.ucsd.edu>
To: Chris.S.Mottram@ecc.com, Tigers List
Chris, This question was discussed recently on the list. My suggestion is to set the maximum castor you can obtain (+4-5 degrees) with about minus 1/2 degree of camber for everyday street driving. More negative camber is desirable for better cornering. However, camber tends to cause more vibrations when going over bumps in the road and uneven tire wear. Toe-in should be very slight if you have a good tight front end; maybe 1/16" or 1/8". The problem with most alignment shops is they don't do a very accurate job on toe. "Tow in" is always to be avoided, but AAA is your best bet when required.
Bob
At 07:36 AM 9/4/98 -0400, Chris.S.Mottram@ecc.com wrote:
>Chris S. Mottram@ECCI >09/04/98 07:36 AM
> >I was thinking about going and getting my front end aligned during lunch >today but I forgot my shop manual. What are the castor, camber and tow in >supposed to be for a MK1a?
> >Thanks,
>Chris >B382001587LXRFE
Robert L. Palmer Dept. of AMES, Univ. of Calif., San Diego rpalmer@ames.ucsd.edu rpalmer@cts.com
Subject: Re: ball joint boots
Date: Sat, 12 Sep 1998 09:07:56 -0700
From: Bob Palmer <rpalmer@ames.ucsd.edu>
To: "Jim Shadowen" <shad@gate.net>, <Tigers List>
Jim, et Listers,
Glad you asked this question Jim, because I have an excellent answer. Go to your local Toyota dealer and get two "Dust Seals" part number 45479-30030. When I bought two in June of '96 they cost $7.99 each. Even if you buy new upper ball joints, throw the original boots away and get these. They will last a whole lot longer than the notoriously bad British rubber that comes with their upper ball joints (as your experience confirms).
If you want lower ball joint boots, try the ones for a Type II VW bus, part number 211405-375. Again, these are much better than what originally comes with the lower ball joints. Now, I could also give you a link with the word "balljoint" in the URL, but you all know how dangerous that could be. However, don't let me inhibit you from trying it on your own.
Bob
At 11:27 AM 9/12/98 -0400, Jim Shadowen wrote:
>I remember a post recently looking for a source for upper ball joint boots.
>Don't recall that there was any response.
>
Was under the Tiger last night and noticed I need them too. Does anyone
>recall a source?
>
>Jim
Robert L. Palmer Dept. of AMES, Univ. of Calif., San Diego rpalmer@ames.ucsd.edu rpalmer@cts.com
Subject: Re: Front Springs and Shocks
Date: Fri, 18 Sep 1998 22:43:18 EDT
From: MWood24020@aol.com
To: johnc@nait.ab.ca, Tigers List
In a message dated 98-09-18 17:42:56 EDT, you write:
<< I know that this subject has come up before but I wonder what is the best combination of shocks and springs for a street driven TIGER? >>
Jeez John, you might as well ask who is the most beautiful woman in the world (besides my wife, of course). All kidding aside, you will get many responses from individuals who all feel that one way is the only way. Some believe in relatively low spring rates with big sway bars. Others say make it as stiff as you can stand, springwise, and damn the bars. Some swear by Konis, others like Spax shocks... IMHO, I like the back end fairly soft with no sway bar, to keep oversteer in check. I built up a set of Alpine leaf springs (using an extra second leaf to stiffen them up) and re-arced them to lower ride height a bit (not too low, I KNOW riding around on the bump stops is an unsettling experience and I'm also not into kidney belts, which stiff enough springs to work in a race height application would neccessitate). I run single-adjustable Konis. Softest setting, unless I am autocrossing or doing open track, in which case I crank them up about 1/3. I also run bolt-on Traction Masters, which most agree work much better than the weld-ons. One other thing, I left the rear-most spring bundles unclamped, like the old Mopar "Super Stock" springs, which helps with forward traction capability. In the front I run Sunbeam Specialties springs, which I seem to remember are 450#. Some go as high as 600# and report no real deterioration of ride (which I have great difficulty believing). I had to cut about 1 1/2 coils out of the springs to get ride height where I wanted. I use the stock sway bar, and Koni shocks. The Konis are usually at 1/2 full stiff, unless competing, in which case they go to full stiff. FYI, Sunbeam Specialties will soon have urethane A-arm bushings and improved ball joints available. Don't ask me how soon... That's my take on the situation.
Mike
Subject: Re: Front Springs and Shocks (correction)
Date: Fri, 18 Sep 1998 23:11:52 EDT
From: MWood24020@aol.com
To: Tigers List
John,
I just re-read your post Re: Front Springs and Shocks and realize I overlooked two key items:
1. You are only looking for feedback on the FRONT end
2. That the application is, I guess, street only (stock) So, disregard everything I suggested, except the assurance you will get many different answers. To answer the question: New springs, stock ride height (available from Sunbeam Specialties among others), and new shocks (whatever suits your fancy). Make sure all bushings and ball joints are in good shape. Disregard factory alignment specs. Go for as much caster as realistically can be found, 1/2 degree neg. camber and 0-1/16 toe-in.
Another opinion which is worth what you paid for it.
..brought to you by, Mike
Subject: Re: ball joint boots
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1998 19:49:50 -0400
From: "Jim Shadowen" <shad@gate.net>
To: <Tigers List>, "Bob Palmer" rpalmer@ames.ucsd.edu
Bob, Thanks a lot for your post on ball joint boots.
I installed the Toyota seals on my Tiger upper ball joints today and they fit perfectly. The price has risen to over $12 each but still a lot better than changing ball joints. I'll be ordering the VW seals for the lower ball joints now. Jim
-----Original Message-----
From: Bob Palmer <rpalmer@ames.ucsd.edu>
To: Jim Shadowen <shad@gate.net>; tiger list <Tigers List>
Date: Saturday, September 12, 1998 12:05 PM
Subject: Re: ball joint boots
>Jim, et Listers,
>
>Glad you asked this question Jim, because I have an excellent answer. Go to
>your local Toyota dealer and get two "Dust Seals" part number 45479-30030.
>When I bought two in June of '96 they cost $7.99 each. Even if you buy new
>upper ball joints, throw the original boots away and get these. They will
>last a whole lot longer than the notoriously bad British rubber that comes
>with their upper ball joints (as your experience confirms).
>
>If you want lower ball joint boots, try the ones for a Type II VW bus, part
>number 211405-375. Again, these are much better than what originally comes
>with the lower ball joints.
>
>Now, I could also give you a link with the word "balljoint" in the URL, but
>you all know how dangerous that could be. However, don't let me inhibit you
>from trying it on your own.
>
>Bob
>At 11:27 AM 9/12/98 -0400, Jim Shadowen wrote:
>>I remember a post recently looking for a source for upper ball joint boots.
>>Don't recall that there was any response.
>>
>> Was under the Tiger last night and noticed I need them too. Does anyone
>>recall a source?
>>
>>Jim
>>
>Robert L. Palmer
>Dept. of AMES, Univ. of Calif., San Diego
>rpalmer@ames.ucsd.edu
>rpalmer@cts.com >
Subject: Re: Too Quiet on the List...
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 18:59:31 -0800
From: "Bob Hokanson" <tgrr2@gte.net>
To: "Tigers" <Tigers List>, "Barsness, Jeff" <barsnej@WSDOT.WA.GOV> ---------- >
From: Barsness, Jeff <barsnej@WSDOT.WA.GOV> >
To: 'Tigers List' >
Subject: RE: Too Quiet on the List... >
Date: Monday, October 26, 1998 1:05 PM
> OK Larry, I've got a set of American Racing Torque Thrust D wheels. The
> five spoke ones. The bolt pattern is the standard Ford 5 on 4 1/2. I
> want to use them on my Alger. The rear is no problem, but the front is a
> different story. My problem is how do I keep the stock A-arms and still
> mount the wheels. I've been looking at putting Mustang 2 ball joints in
> with a 2" dropped spindle. Can it be done? How? Has anyone put different
> spindles in their Sunbeam?
>
> Jeff Barsness
Jeff, you don't have to change the spindles to accommodate the 5 on 4 1/2 bolt pattern. The stock hub can be redrilled with the new pattern, but if you want to change spindles, I recall that Tom Patton wrote a brief article some years ago about changing to Pinto spindles.
Bob
Subject: Re: IRS for Sunbeams
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 16:20:54 EST
From: Carmods@aol.com
To: tigerpb@ids.net, Tigers List
In a message dated 98-10-28 17:17:38 EST, tigerpb@ids.net writes:
<< Anyone got a late Model Tbird/Cougar? They all came with IRS, and the 4 bolt wheel pattern matches the Tiger. Might be interesting- they're more plentiful than Jags in the boneyard and probably a lot cheaper to buy. Get out the tape measure and report back! >>
Hi Paul,
The late model T Bird/Cougar/Mark VIII use a 5 bolt 110mm pattern. I have redrilled the mounting flange to a 5 bolt 4 1/4 inch pattern which fits 5 bolt Mustang wheels. Also the tread would need to be narrowed by nearly 4 inches to keep the wheels under the fenders which may be possible. I've been able to narrow the tread by 2.75 inches to fit a Cobra Replica and shorten the halfshafts without having to cut new splines. The carriers are aluminum and the brakes are disks. The Mark VIII used aluminum lower suspension arms which are very light and look pretty good. So as you say, those cars are showing up in junk yards and they might be a good choice for a Tiger.
John Logan
Subject: Size of front end parts
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1998 20:42:12 -0500
From: James Barrett <jamesbrt@mindspring.com>
To: Tigers List
Folks, Tiger Folks,
The following info is what I have come up with. I can not say that these numbers are completely accurate. Some items may be off, don't know for sure, I used various sources and measuring methods. Some of this is from a Zeroxed drawing expanded to "full scale" The source of the measurement is included on each item: Sizes in inches: Any additional information or corrections gladly accepted.
Distance from centerline of rack to the center of rotation of spindle. 10 Mayf
Length of the steering arm from center of steering rotation to center of tie rod end ball. 5.25 Mayf
Angle of steering arm from center of steering 11 Degrees Mayf rotation to center of tie rod end ball. (relative to surface of disk or wheel)
Length of tie rod from rack ball center to tie rod end ball center. 12.5 Tape measure with bellows still on. Not convinced this is correct.
Length of Upper A arm from pivot to center of upper ball. 7.875 Scaled from Zerox
Length of Lower A arm from pivot to center of lower ball. 14.125 Scaled from Zerox
Length of Lower A arm pivot to the cross bolt of the lower ball joint 12.9. This number came from the Alpine shop manual and I used it as the reference to scale the Zerox of the front end drawing.
Distance from upper A arm pivot to lower A Arm pivot. (or fulcrums , what ever they are called) 10.5 vertical, 5 horz. Scaled from Zerox
Spindle length, center of upper ball to center of lower ball. 10.125 Scaled from Zerox
Height of tierod ball relative to center of lower ball of the spindle. 4.5 (Top surface of steering arm is 6 up from lower ball.
Tie rod ball 1 1/2 down from top surface). Tape measure and scaled from Zerox
Height of centerline of rack relative to center of tie rod ball. ( when Tiger is at normal ride Height).-5/16 Or 4 3/16 up from center of lower ball joint. [Not sure of this measurement, hard to measure]. Tape measure
Toe in (or out)change from stopped measurement to under speed load. i.e. suspension compliance effects on toe in. ?
Steering axis inclination. 7 degrees (in at top) Scaled from Zerox
Caster ESTIMATED 4 degrees ( back at top). WAG
Upper A arm angle 2.5 Degrees ( lower at ball joint) Scaled from Zerox
Upper A arm antidive angle ?
Lower A arm degrees. 0 at rest. Scaled from Zerox
Spindle up from lower ball joint center 2 13/16. Scaled from Zerox
All the above have impacts to the angle the tires are; given a fixed rack movement. The following value may be of use for figuring spring rate / height changes:
Lower fulcrum center to shock mounting bolt 7 3/16. i.e. the center of the spring. Scaled from Zerox
Length of Lower A arm from pivot to center of lower ball. Distance from upper A arm pivot to lower A Arm pivot. (or fulcrums , what ever they are called) Spindle length, center of upper ball to center of lower ball. Height of tierod ball relative to center of lower ball of the spindle. Height of centerline of rack relative to center of tie rod ball. ( when Tiger is at normal ride Height). Toe in (or out)change from stopped measurement to under speed load. i.e. suspension compliance effects on toe in. All the above have impacts to the angle the tires are; given a fixed rack movement.
James Barrett Tiger II 351C and others
Subject: Re: WHERE ARE THEY NOW?
Date: Sat, 05 Dec 1998 16:43:24 -0800
From: Tom Hall <modtiger@engravers.com>
To: "Tim Jordan" tjordan@wagnerprocess.com
CC: Tigers List
At 04:15 PM 12/3/98 -0800, you wrote:
>Tigers,
>
>We need not go across "The Pond" to search for infamous Tigers that may or
>may not exist or have ever been built. We have several significant Tigers
>that are either lost or slowly dying right in our own backyard. The three
>Tigers listed below have not been seen or driven for many years. Two are
>definitely still living, although they are said to be in many pieces and
>the other is a "mystery".
>...
>The Hollywood Sportscar Tiger (Adams/Spencer) is still in the hands of Bill
>Miller. Not much information on its condition has been forthcoming even
>though at least one top level STOA officer has recently inspected the car.
>I believe the car is disassembled and has been so for many years. Rumor is
>that Bill may entertain offers to sell, or restore it for all of us to admire?
With respect to the HSC #55, The car is indeed in the position of Bill Miller who is not at this time a participant of this particular mode of Marque communication. I recently inspected the subject vehicle for the purpose of adding this Tiger as well as Bill's "purchased new" street Tiger to the list of TACed Tigers. Although I am not now an "officer" in STOA, I was acting in my role as a Senior Inspector for the Tiger Authentication Committee. Because of the geographic location of Bill's Tigers, two of our new TAC inspectors on the East Coast were able to complete the authentication procedure. The inspection was without incident, in fact the original colour code #53 was visible in certain locations. The shell is complete and has both front and rear suspension allowing the car to be rolled on its original mag wheels. The assembly does lack the rest of the motive power at this point, and I don't know precisely what motor would come with the shell. It is my understanding, that the original "Spencer built" 260 was never re-united with the #55 shell. It does have several of the original "trick" parts such as the quick rack in the Tiger housing, and the reversed caliper front brake system. I took several digital photos of the car and anticipate future publication in STOA's Tiger Tracks newsletter. Further inquiries about this special Tiger should be made directly with Mr. Bill Miller.
Tom Hall
Subject: Re: Koni's
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1998 11:13:14 -0800
From: Bob Palmer <rpalmer@ames.ucsd.edu>
To: "Bill Lawrence" <billlawrence@hotmail.com>, Tigers List, Jay_Laifman@countrywide.com
Bell, Jay, et Listers,
I've tried various shocks on my Tiger, SHO, and other "performance" vehicles including Bilstein (that's Bil-stine, not bil-steen), Spax, etc., but so far never Konis. I have also looked for cheaper solutions that work acceptably well. In particular, I am now using shocks for a Ford 1/2 ton van application on the rear of my Tiger. I found they were dead ringers for the oem Tiger rear shocks, but of course somewhat stiffer. The ones I got seem to be more-or-less 50/50 as you would want for performance driving rather than the soft compression, soft rebound type engineered more for ride comfort. These shocks may be a bit stiff for the stock rear springs, but if you have stiffened the springs as I have, they seem to be about right. I got ones made by Gabriel, but Monroe might be a bit higher quality (and price). I also got the "hijacker" version that lets me adjust the ride height with air pressure. This really comes in handy with my low basic ride height. The part number on the Gabriels I bought is 39173. They work a whole lot better than the Spax they replaced, and cheaper too. I have mentioned the use of these shocks previously, but thought it might be apropos to repeat in the current thread.
Merry Christmas from Sunny S.D., Bob
At 09:45 AM 12/23/98 -0800, Bill Lawrence wrote
: > >Tigers
>Truesports, in Columbus OH is also an excellent source for sales and
>service of Koni Shocks.
> >Bill Lawrence
>>
>>
>>I spoke to Rick a week or so ago about shocks. He has pretty much run
>out of Koni's. Koni requires orders of 100 or more. Last time Rick split
>the order with CAT. He did not seem to think there was enough demand for
>him to order them just now.
>>Here are two companies that advertise Koni's in my Porsche magazine: >>Paragon Products, 800 200-9366 orders, 512 289-8834 info, and RD >>Enterprises 800 683-2890 orders, 619 444-9768 info, www.shox.com. >> >>They may be worth a try.
>>
>>Jay
>>
>>
>
> Robert L. Palmer Dept. of AMES, Univ. of Calif., San Diego rpalmer@ames.ucsd.edu rpalmer@cts.com
Subject: Re: Koni's
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1998 18:59:02 -0800
From: Steve Laifman
To: Bill Lawrence billlawrence@hotmail.com
CC: Tigers List, Jay_Laifman@countrywide.com
References: 1
Bill,
The adjustable Koni shocks that Rick split ordered with CAT were specially designed in fit and function for the Tiger. All the other shocks, SPAX, even earlier Koni's, were just what fit. That's one reason for minimum order that Rick split with CAT, and the reason they are so expensive ($125/wheel). Lot's of dealers sell Koni's, but not these. If CAT still has some, I'd join CAT quick and get some while they are still available. Minimum order is 100 each design, for the next set of specials.
Steve
Subject: Koni part numbers
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1998 22:32:36 -0500
From: Rande Bellman <rande@thecia.net> Organization: The 122 Group
To: Tiger News Group <Tigers List>
For those of you with a good source for Koni, their part number for Tiger application is 82-1347 for the front and 82-1348 for the rear and the street price is between $100-125 per wheel. The Alpine series numbers for the front is 80-1703 and 80-1704 for the rear. These part numbers are from a 1986 Koni catalog, and they were the ones I bought from Rick when he had stock.
Subject: Re: Koni part numbers different!
Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1998 11:09:57 -0800
From: Steve Laifman
To: Rande Bellman rande@thecia.net
CC: Tiger News Group <Tigers List>
References: 1
Rande Bellman wrote:
For those of you with a good source for Koni, their part number for
> Tiger application is 82-1347 for the front and 82-1348 for the rear and
> the street price is between $100-125 per wheel.
> These part numbers are from a 1986 Koni catalog, and they were the ones
> I bought from Rick when he had stock.
Rande,
My numbers do NOT agree with the ones you give, at least for the rears. Rick did carry a line of Koni's that were NOT the "special" Adjustable with an external screw fitting on the top of the rod, but required that the shock be disconnected from the lower support, collapsed, and rotated to change for wear, not course or ride mods (although they may be the same thing).
The key here is, although both shocks are 'adjustable', only one is specifically made for the Tiger/Alpine that has external adjustment. Just pulled my original Koni rear shock box off the shelf. I purchased these adjustable rear shocks from Sunbeam Specialties, and they were part of the special order. The come is a boxed set of 2, and are labeled 'SPECIAL "D"'. Further the printed paste-on label from Koni reads "Koni Special 8210 1164", "Made in Holland 4896" The label affixed by Rick is: Sunbeam Specialties SA51KM Koni large rear shock Qty. 2 Alpine IV-V, Tiger
Steve Laifman
Subject: RE: Springs
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1999 14:08:11 -0700
From: Theo Smit <TSmit@novatel.ca>
To: "'Mike Burd'" <mikeburd@email.msn.com>,
Tiger Questions tigers@triumph.cs.utah.edu
1, Measure the coil wire diameter accurately (use vernier calipers or micrometers) of both the new springs and your stock ones. You get "d1" and "d2"
3. Count the number of coils in each spring, and subtract 1/2 a coil. You get "n1" and "n2" To a first-order approximation, the relative stiffness of spring set 1 to spring set 2 is ((d1/d2)^4 ) * (n2 / n1). The spring rate is proportional to the fourth power of the wire diameter, and inversely proportional to the number of coils. I ignored the effect of reducing the helical diameter, since it (hopefully) didn't change very much. You can figure out how much the car will settle onto the new springs (again, approximately) by measuring the stock spring installed on the car with the car on the ground. Then if you subtract that from the length specified in the manual, you know the amount of spring compression. The heavier spring will compress less in proportion to how much stiffer it is. Combined with its shorter initial length, you may end up with nearly the same ride height. Example: Spring 1 has a free length of 10" and a compressed (on the car) length of 6.5". Spring 2, which has twice the rate as calculated above, has a free length of 8". Since it's twice as strong, it will only compress (3.5/2) = 1.75" under the same load, giving a loaded length of 6.25". So the car will sit about 1/2" lower (the springs sit about halfway out on the control arm). I could go dig through a bunch of reference material if you want precise numbers and equations. I would guesstimate that you could run 50% stiffer springs without turning the car into a real kidneybuster, but that also depends on the tire size and aspect ratio you run.
Theo Smit tsmit@novatel.ca
B382002705
> -----Original Message----- >
From: Mike Burd [SMTP:mikeburd@email.msn.com] > Sent: Monday, January 11, 1999 2:20 PM >
To: Tiger Questions >
Subject: Springs
> I am finishing a project someone else started. They obtained front springs
> for it that are a much heavier coil but the same outside diameter. The
> spring length on the bench is almost 3 inches shorter than what the manual
> says is the correct length for stock springs. The previous owner says he was
> told, where he purchased them in England, that the originals were soft and
> with the 302 these stronger springs would make it handle better but have
> little effect on the handling. Does anyone have any experience with these
> heavier shorter springs. Will it effect the height of the car?I don't mind
> it a little harder ride but my wife and I plan on traveling in the car and I
> don't want any complaints.
Thanks Mike mikeburd@msn.com
Subject: Re: Springs and donuts
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 08:20:30 -0800
From: "Jay Laifman" <Jay_Laifman@countrywide.com>
To: tigers@triumph.cs.utah.edu
DJoh797014@aol.com wrote:
>I installed the CAT springs years ago and have been pleased, The trick is
>to replace the rubber donuts when the springs are replaced. This does cause
>the Tiger to initially ride high until everything settles down.
FYI, the CAT rubber donuts are thicker than the stock ones. SS's are stock. And, Capri ones apparently fit but are even thinner than stock. I believe the CAT ones were intentionally made thicker, but I do not remember for sure, or the reason.
Jay
Subject: Shocking news
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 13:41:47 EST
From: DJoh797014@aol.com
To: tigers@triumph.cs.utah.edu
My original Armstrong Heavy Duty shock had the following dimensions: Extended Length 12 3/4 in Collapsed Length 8 in Top fitting stud Bottom fitting 1 1/2 in ring with 3/8 sleeve bushing No dust cover Monroe Gasmatic # 8248 fits the above specs except the sleeve is 2 1/4 in and uses a 7/16 in bolt. The trick is to use the old sleeve to push out the new sleeve. Using a 4 in vise 3/8 in drive 3/8 socket and a 1 1/2 in pipe 'T' fitting, I pressed the old sleeve out of the old shock. The putting the new shock in the vise, I started pressing the new sleeve out of the new shock with the socket, until the new sleeve was just starting into the rubber bushing (about 1/16 in). The I switched from the socket to the old sleeve and pressed the new sleeve out with the old sleeve. When pressing the new sleeve out, press forward about 1/2 in and then release the pressure to avoid tearing the rubber bushing. It doesn't take long for you to complete the job. Paint the shock Armstrong blue and mount using the original bolt and bracket. Remember to press the new sleeve with the old. It you remove the new sleeve first, the hole in the busing will collapse to about 1/8 inch and you'll never get the old sleeve in.
Subject: Re: Stub axle carrier
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1999 00:49:57 EST
From: DJoh797014@aol.com
To: dbinkley@argotech.com
CC: Tigers List
Dave
Try this on each side:
1. Loosen lug nuts. Loosen or remove nut at end of lower ball joint mounting bolt. This is not the nut at the end of the ball joint itself. DO NOT REMOVE the bolt. Do all this so you are worried about pulling the car off jacks
2. Jack car and place jacks stands under the frame in front of the door. I also placed one in the middle of the cross member. Better safe than sorry.
3. Remove wheel.
4. Remove the shock absorber through spring.
5. Place jack under A-arm and raise enough to unload the ball joint. Loosen the nut on top of the joint about 3/8 in. DO NOT REMOVE THE NUT!!
6. Slowly lower the jack while tapping around the spindle. The strength of the spring will separate the joint with a very loud BANG. Don't worry the nut will hold.
7. Raise jack again enough to allow you to remove the nut. Drive the mounting bolt out.
8. Slowly lower the jack. The ball joint will fall from the spindle.
9. Rotate the A-arm down and remove the spring.
10. Remove the lower A-arm.
11. Remove the upper A-arm keeping the alignment shims in order.
12. Remove the upper ball joint nut until its even with the end of the stud. A few taps with a 5 lb. precision adjustment tool will free it.
14. Replace everything.
15. I recommend Caterpiller bolts and nuts. They are all grade 8 or better and oil phosphate treated and have rolled threads. Far superior to the crap you at parts stores including Dorman.
Dave
Subject: Re: Late SV's, Tigers and ride height
Date: Thu, 25 Feb 1999 22:09:09 -0800
From: Bob Palmer <rpalmer@ames.ucsd.edu>
To: "Jay Laifman" <Jay_Laifman@countrywide.com>, alpines list, Tigers List
At 11:05 AM 2/25/99 -0800, Jay Laifman wrote:
snip, snip, snip
>
>If this turns out to be true, I may have for sale a pair of factory
>original Tiger springs that have seen very little stress relative to 30
>years on a Tiger.
>
>Jay
Jay, Although I consider it highly doubtful that the Tiger's front springs were also used on the later Alpines (SV), I also consider it a moot point, since even the stock Tiger springs are rather soft and have been discarded by many owners for that reason. When I tossed my stock springs, back in '77, I replaced them with the 330 #/in CAT springs, which were significantly stiffer than the ones they replaced. More recently, I have gone to 450 #/in springs from Coil Spring Specialties, which is probably near the limit of acceptable street ride for most tastes, but suits me perfectly. I went to CCS because they had done springs for so many STOA members. I simply had to tell them the spring rate and ride height I wanted and a couple of weeks later I had my springs. (Unlike the CAT springs, they were even wound the right direction!) Coil Spring Specialties has long since relocated somewhere in the Midwest, but I believe that Dale has had them supply his springs and was very happy with the quality. I am not sure what selection Dale currently has or how to contact CCS directly, but I believe most Tiger owners would be happier with at least somewhat stiffer springs than came stock on the Tiger. My $0.02 worth,
Bob Robert L. Palmer Dept. of AMES, Univ. of Calif., San Diego rpalmer@ames.ucsd.edu rpalmer@cts.com
Subject: Re: Late SV's, Tigers and ride height
Date: Fri, 26 Feb 1999 11:55:14 EST
From: CAtkisson@aol.com
To: Jay_Laifman@countrywide.com, alpines@autox.team.net, Tigers List
Jay,
The easiest way to tell if you have stock original Tiger springs, there will be a green paint stripe hand brushed down one side. If they are Alpine they will have an orange stripe. That’s after you remove all the road grime. If you need to replace your springs Rick at S.S. has replacements available.
Larry Atkisson
Subject: Re: Front suspension bushings
Date: Sun, 07 Mar 1999 23:02:48 -0800
From: Tom Hall <modtiger@engravers.com>
To: "Andy Walker" <awtiger@ix.netcom.com>
CC: Tigers List
At 12:18 AM 3/7/99 -0600, you wrote: ...
>I have a new question now; please pardon me if this has already been
>discussed to death. Does anybody sell urethane upper and lower A-arm
>bushings for Tigers? Upon inspection today, I find that my original style
>bushings are looking a bit tired and I believe I would like to try some
>urethane bushings if they're available. Anybody know where a fella could
>pick up some of those?
Rick at SS is expecting his first shipment of A-Arm urethane bushings within a couple of months. I assembled the prototype set recently and they seem to "fit" better than most of the older rubber bushings that have been available. I don't know for sure what the exact specs for production bushings will be at this time, but the design of the prototypes was to have the urethane pivoting or rotating on the inner metal sleeve and bonded to the outer sleeve. Because of this design, I elected to drill the A-Arms and bushings for grease fittings to provide for lubrication and reduce the tendency for this bushing pivot surface to rust. This procedure will be issued as a Tech Tip in Tiger Tracks as soon as Rick has a firm delivery date. I expect him to enclose copies or excerpts of this Tip with the bushing sets.
Tom Hall
Subject: Re: Shocks
Date: Tue, 16 Mar 1999 15:11:50 -0500
From: "Paul J. Burr" <tigerpb@ids.net>
To: "Stig Ram" <stig.ram@mbox200.swipnet.se>, <Tigers List> -----Original Message-----
From: Stig Ram <stig.ram@mbox200.swipnet.se>
To: Tigers List <Tigers List>
Date: Tuesday, March 16, 1999 2:56 PM
Subject: Shocks
>The vernal equinox is rapidly approaching and my 260 Tiger needs new
>shocks!!! They are intended for mostly well-combed black top summer
>driving with occasional heavy cornering. I would appreciate any
>suggestion for what types / brands that fits. Perhaps as references to
>modern cars that are fairly common in Europe. Its an advantage if the
>shocks are decently priced.
> > > :-) Stig, guardian of CXP 263 (Sweden)
I used an old CAT tech tip to buy shocks at the corner parts store. Corvette rear shocks from a 63-67(and perhaps into the mid 70's) are a bolt in for the rear of the TIger. I've also heard that Camaro shocks from the same era will work, but I never used them. I used mid 60's Cadillac front shocks. You'll have to cut the lower bolt tube flush with the rubber grommet on the shock. A hacksaw works fine, and then they'll bolt right in. This combo opens up a big price and brand name selection. In fact, I once bought a set of Gabriel adjustable shocks that worked really nice. A set of 4 cost about what you'd pay for 1 1/2 Koni's!
Subject: Re: Shocks
Date: Tue, 16 Mar 1999 18:18:54 -0500
From: twojohnsons@home.com
To: "Paul J. Burr" <tigerpb@ids.net>
CC: Stig Ram <stig.ram@mbox200.swipnet.se>, Tigers List
References: 1
I wouldn't do that. Get the Spax 14 position adjustables made for Tiger and get a shock designed and valved for a lightweight sports car, not one intended to dampen a 3-ton Caddy. CAT used to stock them. this valving can be adjusted firmer and softer, not just increasingly harder, like the Koni.
Subject: Re: Shocks
Date: Wed, 17 Mar 1999 09:21:29 EST
From: Carmods@aol.com
To: stig.ram@mbox200.swipnet.se, Tigers List
Hi Stig, For the front of your Sunbeam, front shocks for the front of the Pinto or Mustang II fit if you replace the long lower steel bushings with the short ones from your present shocks. They are available from many manufactures. I usually use the Monroe gas shocks.
John Logan
Subject: Alternative Shocks
Date: Wed, 17 Mar 1999 08:12:43 -0800
From: "Jay Laifman" <Jay_Laifman@countrywide.com>
To: Tigers List
>I used an old CAT tech tip to buy shocks at the corner parts store. Corvette
>rear shocks from a 63-67(and perhaps into the mid 70's) are a bolt in for
r >the rear of the TIger. I've also heard that Camaro shocks from the same era
>will work, but I never used them.
>I used mid 60's Cadillac front shocks. You'll have to cut the lower bolt
>tube flush with the rubber grommet on the shock. A hacksaw works fine,
>then they'll bolt right in.
I used the same CAT tech tip, but changed it slightly.
I pressed the correct bolt tube out of the old shocks with a deep reach socket, then pressed the correct bolt tube into the bottom of the new shocks, pushing the long ones out as it went in. It was very easy, using only a standard vise for a press.
Jay
Subject: RE: Front wheel bearings
Date: Fri, 19 Mar 1999 15:43:43 -0700
From: Theo Smit <TSmit@novatel.ca>
To: "'Dave Binkley'" <dbinkley@argotech.com>, <Tigers List>
The method I usually use is the following, which assumes that the front spindle is attached to a relatively immovable object (such as the car):
1. Remove the grease cap, cotter pin, spindle nut and washer, and the outer wheel bearing, then thread the spindle nut back on. Unbolt the brake caliper and position it out of the way.
2. Grab the hub and pull it quickly toward you in such a way that the inner bearing race slides along the top surface of the spindle, and then hits the back of the spindle nut. You're using the hub/rotor mass as a slide hammer, and the inside bearing as a drift. This action will usually remove the grease seal without damage. Check the inner bearing cage carefully afterward.
Theo Smit tsmit@novatel.ca B382002705
> -----Original Message----- >
From: Dave Binkley [SMTP:dbinkley@argotech.com]
> Sent: Friday, March 19, 1999 3:33 PM >
To: 'Tiger List' >
Subject: Front wheel bearings >
Wow, the front suspension is almost all back together. Won't be long now.
> Here's a pretty simple question. What's the best way to remove the inner
> wheel bearing and grease seal on the front hubs? Is it possible to get them
> out without destroying the grease seal? Looking for tips before I start
> prying too much. Mine have been in there a while and need some
> encouragement.
>
> Thanks, > > Dave
Subject: Shocks
Date: Sun, 02 May 1999 23:32:48 -0400
From: richards <richards@northcoast.com>
To: Tigers List References: 1
I just purchased some KYB shocks for the Tiger. The numbers are: Front-KG4509 Rear-KG5522.KYB Price-$40.00 each. The shocks are gas charged at about 200 psi. Lifetime warranty. The front shocks require a larger lower mounting bolt. They are white in color.
Chris in Trinidad
Subject: Re: Shocks
Date: Fri, 7 May 1999 14:30:19 -0700
From: "Jay Laifman" <Jay_Laifman@countrywide.com>
To: richards@northcoast.com, Tigers List
I just called KYB. Those front shocks were for a Dodge Dart, and their full compression is 9.5". The stock compression on the Alpine anyway (I am assuming they are the same) is 8.875". They had two other shocks listed that compress enough, and extend enough: KG4507 - compress 8.14", extend 12.28" KG4605A- compress 8.26", extend 12.4" Stock extension is 12.125" The 4605A is about 30% softer than the 4507. He thought the 4605A would be firmer than stock on the Alpine, the 4507 might be too stiff, but would be fine for the Tiger. The 4605A has a bottom steel sleeve that is 1.5" long, with a 12mm ID. The 4507 has a bottom steel sleeve that is 1.5" long, with a 7/16" ID. I easily pressed my stock sleeves into other shocks. It can probably be done here. On the rubber bushings on top, he said their rubber bushings on top would probably be undersized for either the Tiger or Alpine. He suggested picking up some stepped urethane mounts which are supposedly generally available. For the rears 5522, those compress to 13.03" and extend to 21.3". Stock is 12.5" and 20.25, respectively. There is also KG4762 that compress to 13.6 and extend to 21.73. I forgot to ask about the respective pressures on the rear shocks. Remember that although you probably won't extend a shock when driving, you will do so when jacking up the car. So your entire suspension will be hanging by your shocks. I have Monroe 2067 on my fronts and Gabriel 42340 Red Ryder on the rears. They are a bit soft.
Jay P.S. Their number in Chicago is 800 592-2677.
Jay Laifman 05/03/99 08:56 AM
To: richards@northcoast.com@internet, Tigers List@internet cc:
Subject: Shocks You wrote:
>I just purchased some KYB shocks for the Tiger. The numbers are:
>Front-KG4509
>Rear-KG5522.KYB
>Price-$40.00 each.
What kind of car are they from? Where did you get the numbers? I called KYB directly about 5 years ago. They went through their lists with me. But, they could never find one for the front that was short enough not to bottom out on compression. Do you know the compression and extension figures on them?
Jay
Subject: Re: 351 heat problems
Date: Thu, 13 May 1999 08:36:51 -0700
From: Bob Palmer <rpalmer@ames.ucsd.edu>
To: Chris.S.Mottram@ecc.com, Tigers List
Chris, et Listers,
If your Tiger doesn't feel solid as a rock at 70mph, then I can't believe it has anything to do with an air dam, or lack thereof. Loose suspension components like ball joints, tie rod ends, etc. could be a problem. Soft springs and/or shocks could the problem as well. Check the alignment; toe-in, caster and camber. And, of course, a good set of well balanced tires is essential. With my SHO, the original shocks were too soft, which gave me what I might describe as a "floating" sensation at speeds over 70mph. Replaced them with Tokico struts and this solved the problem. Your problem could be this simple too, or the accumulation of a lot of little problems such as I have mentioned. I would go through all of these points systematically before bolting on any quick-fix cure.
TTFN, Bob
At 09:45 AM 5/13/99 -0400, Chris.S.Mottram@ecc.com wrote: > >Chris S. Mottram@ECCI >05/13/99 09:45 AM >
>My Tiger "floats" at 70mph. Did you see any improvement at lower speeds?
>Was is very noticeable? I see lots of new cars with various black plastic
>airdams underneath that I don't think would look too bad under a Sunbeam.
>Has anyone found a nice looking airdam in a junkyard that is a reasonable
>fit? I don't ever want to see 130 mph on my speedo unless I push the
>needle there with my finger :-)
>Chris > >
Robert L. Palmer Dept. of AMES, Univ. of Calif., San Diego rpalmer@ames.ucsd.edu rpalmer@cts.com
Subject: Re: Ackerman Geometry and Chateau Elan
Date: Wed, 02 Jun 1999 11:43:04 -0700
From: Bob Palmer <rpalmer@ames.ucsd.edu>
To: Steve Laifman, Chris.S.Mottram@ecc.com
CC: Tigers List
References: 1
Steve, Chris, et Listers,
Not sure how much, if any of this post is "tongue-in-cheek", but Rick McCleod sells the same part number for both Alpine S-IV &V and Tiger and I personally have never heard of any different specifications between Tigers and Alpines in this regard. It is true, however, that Tiger lower ball joints have a habit of breaking, "exploding" if you will, when backing up because of (I believe) the bad Ackerman geometry peculiar to the Tiger. At full lock, the Tiger front wheels toe in about 3"!! This puts quite a lot of stress on the suspension parts and causes the squealing you hear when navigating tight corners on a smooth surface. Apparently, the stresses are even greater when backing up, because this seems to be when they usually break. With regard to Chris's question about the "longer" MGB steering arms, I use them and recommend them highly, having mentioned them several times previously on the List. They work primarily because they are angled out instead of straight ahead like the stock Tiger arms. Being longer (ca. 0.5") helps a little too. Moving the rack back 0.5" helps a little bit more. Having done all these things, I can tell you that the squealing in turns has gone away and my cars rolls freely in tight turns, even going backwards. I use a quick ratio rack, but still have a standard diameter steering wheel. I believe a Midget rack is a quicker ratio than the stock Tiger rack and is also better built and generally steers easier, so perhaps this compensates for the quicker ratio in terms of steering effort. I personally favor a quicker ratio because it keeps you from having to cross your arms when doing fast, tight maneuvering; e.g., when autocrossing. Ever watch those in-car movies of the Tiger rally car and notice all the wild arm movements of the driver? Bet he would have loved a quicker ration rack.
TTFN,
Bob
At 08:30 AM 6/2/99 -0700, Steve Laifman wrote:
> Chris >
>Ahh, the "Exploding Ball Joints". I keep wondering if some of these aren't
>the Alpine ball joints, rather than the Tiger ones, that the manufacturer
>states are "unsuitable", but doesn't make a Tiger version.
>
>Steve
Subject: Koni Rebuilds?
Date: Fri, 04 Jun 1999 23:02:13 -0400
From: Stu Brennan <sbrennan@master.ncounty.net>
To: Tiger Email Network <Tigers List>
I decided to do a bit of sniffing around on the web to see who might be doing rebuilds of Koni Shocks. Koni USA isn't but their page has a link to True Choice Motorsports in Ohio. Related to the old Jim Trueman Indy car team perhaps? They sell and service all sorts of racing Koni shocks, but they also mention restoration of older shocks. If I read their price list correctly they'll gladly rebuild your old Konis for $175. Each. Price includes painting, of course. Does anybody know of any other places that might be doing this sort of rebuild? And their prices?
Stu
Subject: Re: Ball Joints
Date: Thu, 05 Aug 1999 19:17:28 -0700
From: Tom Hall <modtiger@engravers.com>
To: James Barrett jamesbrt@mindspring.com
CC: Tigers List
At 06:29 PM 8/4/99 -0400, you wrote:
>Folks,
I have replaced upper and lower ball joints many times over the
>years. The price of the replacement ball joints keeps going up and I
>am not so sure they were very good to start with. Has any one out
>there found an alternative upper and lower ball joint that will fit the
>taper of the Tiger spindles? Modification of the A arms to mount the
>alternative ball joints is assumed to be required.
Jim I've developed a system for the lower ball joints that uses some race car hardware welded to a section of the old forged OEM ball joint that accepts the Chrysler style screw in ball joint. I made a set of prototypes that I took to SUNI but haven't had a chance to install them yet. This design fits the stock lower A-Arm without modification. These ball joints are used on lots of current race cars. The taper on the top and bottom of the Tiger spindle is the same but this ball joint and general design won't work for the upper ball joint position unless you have larger wheel diameters because of physical interference. For this I'm looking at the bolt-in GM design ball joint but haven't worked out any details. I have the fixture made to machine the OEM pieces to accept the ball joint rings which also doubles as the welding alignment fixture. Actually this design was created to allow the use of other spindles with the Tiger A-Arms. These two pieces will cover all the reasonably conceivable 7 degree spindle taper sizes above and below the Tiger. I hope to shoot some digital photos soon and complete the AutoCAD layouts at least in 2D. Let me know if your interested in following this project.
Tom
Subject: Re: Ackerman Angle
Date: Tue, 10 Aug 1999 10:53:18 -0400
From: "Doug Mallory" <rdmallory@earthling.net>
To: "Larry Paulick" <larry.p@erols.com>, <Tigers List> U Racen?
(1) 2.5 degrees negative camber
(2) Keep your foot out of it until you are pointed in the direction you want to go.
(3) Slow down to make the turn you can pick up any time you lost when you get through the turn.
(4) Try not to smokem until you have passed every one and then only in front of large crowds.
(5) PS. If Dale sells it is track tested and works.
Doug NCAC State Champ 97 98
-----Original Message-----
From: Larry Paulick <larry.p@erols.com>
To: Tigers List <Tigers List>
Date: Monday, August 09, 1999 8:19 PM
Subject: Ackerman Angle
>Tiger Owner's. Has anyone used the Dale A's Kit for correcting the
>Ackerman Angle, with a car with posi rear end, and experienced the same
>problem noted in a previous posting with posi rear end breaking the car loose?
> > >Larry >
Subject: RE: Ackerman Angle
Date: Tue, 10 Aug 1999 12:29:16 -0400
From: "Fraser, Ron" <Ron.Fraser@usa.xerox.com>
To: "'geewhiz@inreach.com'" <geewhiz@inreach.com>, Tigers List Dale's Restorations Dale Akuszewski 1468 S. Gage St San Bernardino, Ca 92408 Ph # 909 - 799 - 2099 -----Original Message-----
From: geewhiz@inreach.com [mail
To: geewhiz@inreach.com] Sent: Tuesday, August 10, 1999 12:08 PM
To: Tigers List
Subject: Re: Ackerman Angle For the sake of those of us who are new to the list, could someone list the phone number and address of the shop that sells this Ackerman kit? Thanks! Gerard 65 MKI
Subject: RE: Ackerman Angle
Date: Tue, 10 Aug 1999 09:51:46 -0700
From: Bob Palmer <rpalmer@ames.ucsd.edu>
To: "Fraser, Ron" <Ron.Fraser@usa.xerox.com>, "'geewhiz@inreach.com'" <geewhiz@inreach.com>, Tigers List
Listers,
Dale moved a couple of doors down last year. His street number now is: 1482 S. Gage St. The rest is the same.
At 12:29 PM 8/10/99 -0400, Fraser, Ron wrote:
>Dale's Restorations
>Dale Akuszewski
>1468 S. Gage St
>San Bernardino, Ca 92408
>Ph # 909 - 799 - 2099
Subject: Re: Ackerman Angle
Date: Tue, 10 Aug 1999 19:01:10 -0400
From: Larry Paulick <larry.p@erols.com>
To: Bob Palmer <rpalmer@ames.ucsd.edu> CC: Tigers List References: 1 , 2
Bob –
The Dale A kit is indeed an adapter to move the Midget R&P back, with MGB steering arms, and alpine tie rod ends. You supply the Midget R&P, MGB steering arms, and Alpine tie rod ends, and some extra work in installation. I have heard that this conversion is a worthwhile improvement, and am looking forward to feeling the results.
Subject: Re: INQUIRY 081799c (13)
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 1999 13:02:47 EDT
From: TIGEROOTES@aol.com
To: TSmit@novatel.ca, Tigers List
You can use old races to push new races into a hub, but be certain you press or tap on the narrow tapered edge: if you place the races taper to taper, and press both races into the hub, there is not a shoulder there to push the one you used as your tool back out of the hub!
Jim Leach, Seattle
Subject: Re: Bushings
Date: Fri, 03 Sep 1999 23:07:36 -0700
From: a1a09262 <k._fitzgerald@bc.sympatico.ca>
To: Chris <CVaught@hawaii.rr.com>
CC: Tigers List
References: 1
Chris,
A few years ago I let an allegedly knowledgeable friend talk me into Teflon bushings (greaseless). My car now sounds like an old Buick that hasn't been greased in a couple of decades. Make sure whatever you go for doesn't put you in the same predicament. If anyone has a suggestion for a good replacement (street and strip) I would be most interested to hear from them as well.
Mike Clark B382100417
Chris wrote:
Where can I find poly bushings for the front and rear suspension on my
> Tiger. All my stuff is old and rotten so I may as well go with the good
> stuff. If you have a better idea then please let me know. I am always up
> for suggestions. What brake shoes would you recommend for a street/strip
> tiger? I have the Spax up front although I have never had the pleasure to
> try them out. Does anyone have the measurements for the seat frame that is
> welded to the floor, or a supplier for reproductions? Thanks for the
> input!!!!!!!!!!
> Chris
Subject: Re: Bushings
Date: Sat, 4 Sep 1999 02:13:56 EDT
From: MWood24020@aol.com
To: k._fitzgerald@bc.sympatico.ca
CC: Tigers List
In a message dated 9/3/99 11:05:28 PM Pacific Daylight Time, k._fitzgerald@bc.sympatico.ca writes:
<< A few years ago I let an allegedly knowledgeable friend talk me into Teflon bushings (greaseless). My car now sounds like an old Buick that hasn't been greased in a couple of decades. Make sure whatever you go for doesn't put you in the same predicament. If anyone has a suggestion for a good replacement (street and strip) I would be most interested to hear from them as well. >>
I believe Rick @ Sunbeam Specialties now stocks poly urethane bushings for A- arms, sway bar and leaf springs. The A-arm bushings may be "grooved" for accepting grease. Wouldn't you want soft front bushings and no sway bar for strip? I think Tigers have enough problem with weight transfer with their short wheelbase and wouldn't want to add to the problem with a tight front end.
.. Mike
Subject: Front Hub End Float
Date: Sun, 05 Sep 1999 20:11:49 -0700
From: Bob Palmer <rpalmer@ames.ucsd.edu>
To: "Wright, Larry" <larry.wright@usop.com>
CC: Tiger List <Tigers List>
Larry,
I don't know what other responses you have gotten to your question about the front hub end float, but I will give you my two cents worth. When installing new bearings, my experience has been that after a few miles (or few hundred), they will loosen up some and need re-tightening. This is especially true if the bearings haven't been installed using a press or for any reason have not been completely seated (and maybe even if they are).
I have used various greases, sodium based, lithium based, synthetic, molybdenum, etc. My current favorite is Lubriko synthetic LC#2 High Temperature because when things get hot under heavy braking it stays put better than other greases I've tried. Probably most any synthetic will work pretty well though. BTW, I also put O-rings over the bearing cap, between the bearing cap and hub, to keep the hot grease from running out.
As far as measuring end float, this is a very time consuming procedure and, personally, I don't think it's really necessary. I do follow the instructions to torque the axle bolt to 15-20 lb.-ft while rotating the wheel. Then, back off at least 1/12 to 1/6 of a turn. Mount the wheel, then grab it top and bottom and see if you can feel any looseness. If not, then back off another 1/12 and try again. (Don't bother bending the cotter key until you are pretty sure you are finished with the adjustments.) Supposing this time you feel some perceptible looseness, then you are now at the minimum adjustment level (1/12 turn). I used to leave the axle nuts adjusted so there was some perceptible looseness. However, with the last set of bearings, which I installed approximately 60k miles ago, I have kept them tightened to the point of no looseness, determined as I described, by grabbing the wheel top and bottom and alternately pushing and pulling.
When we discussed this adjustment previously on the List, there were some who thought I was asking for premature bearing failure by running them this tight. However, my experience so far seems to be to the contrary. And really, the difference we're talking about is only the minimum 1/12 turn of the axle nut. As far as I can understand, once you have any perceptible looseness, the pre-load is zero and loosening it further could have no good effect. My advice is to make you choice; barely perceptible play or 1/12th tighter and no play at all. Either way, I think you will be fine. I would check those bearings periodically though when you finally get the "Queen" out of the garage and on the road. This is actually good advice for all of us, but especially for the period after installing new bearings. Hope you and everyone on the List is enjoying the Labor Day weekend.
TTFN, Bob Robert L. Palmer UCSD, Dept. of AMES 619-822-1037 (o) 760-599-9927 (h) rpalmer@ucsd.edu rpalmer@cts.com
Subject: Re: springs
Date: Mon, 06 Sep 1999 20:49:23 -0700
From: Bob Palmer <rpalmer@ames.ucsd.edu>
To: mjb2@home.com, Tigers List
Mike,
I know of at least one case of a Tiger with 600 #/in springs and the owner claims it "rides like a Buick". I have 425 #/in springs I got from Coil Spring Specialties about 15 years ago and I find them to be about ideal for the street, but still OK for the track. I would like to drive the 600 #/in car for comparison. I suspect that not all springs of the same nominal stiffness are the same, depending on the source, and I have heard others say the same. You draw a comparison between your Mustang and Tiger with the assumption that they should require springs proportionate to their respective weights. However, this overlooks the geometry of the suspension. The effectiveness of the spring is also a function of the position of the spring relative to the wheel and pivot point, analogous to the mechanical advantage of a lever. For example, if you move the wheel outboard it has the effect of softening the springs since you are applying the weight of the car to a longer lever arm. I don't know the geometry of your Mustang, but it probably is somewhat different than a Tiger. However, having said this (and, pardon me, but I just had to), I think you would find that picking the Tiger springs according to its weight compared with your Mustang to give you a good result; in fact, using your numbers, it would be the 425 #/in springs I use. I infer from your comments about "drive and not plow" that you think stiffening the front springs alone will produce this result. Actually, the stiffer the front springs relative to the back, the more the car will plow (understeer). And we haven't said anything yet about sway bars (maybe later). I would say that the front and rear are very interdependent and if you change the rates at one end, you should change them more-or-less proportionately at the other. In the rear you have the choice of buying a whole new set of leaf springs, or beefing up the stock set. You might want to consider re-arcing them while you're at it. I had two leaves added, powder coated and re-arced at E&C Springs in Escondido, CA. They did a terrific job and I can't think of any single change I've made that has made such an improvement in the handling of the car. I spent almost all my energy for many years working on the front suspension to the neglect of the rear and finally found out just how important the rear is (suspension that is). You might want to consider adding one beefy leaf just under the main leaf and extends the full distance front to rear. This will add stiffness and reduce wind up, although you probably still will want some kind of traction bars. I guess the real message hear is that you are opening an engineering can of worms and there are no quick fixes or magic bullets. Talk to a lot of people, get yourself some car engineering books, and get informed to some degree about roll stiffness, roll center, etc. and, starting with your own philosophy and goals, develop an engineering plan. This would include deciding whether you want to use sway bars (front and/or rear), traction bars, Panhard rod, etc., in addition to the springs per se. Once you have a pretty good idea of your goal, you'll have a lot better chance of getting there. Take your time and, as the Nissan guy says, "Enjoy the ride!" OK, everybody back to work, the holiday's over!! ;-)
Bob
At 07:08 PM 9/6/99 -0700, mjb2@home.com wrote:
>I have a question about springs, front and rear for my 65' tiger. Since
>I received so many answers about the shocks, I figured I might ask about
>springs. this is not a X-cross car. am I to assume (dangerous word) that
>I want to keep the rear springs as designed by the engineers and
>stiffen the fronts? I see that a front is advertised around 325lbs,
>that is give or take. since my 66' mustang has 480's on the front and
>only weighs 300 pounds more than the tiger and rides quite well,
>wouldn't it make sense to at least apply the same thought. I would like
>to drive and not plow, I live in the city.
Robert L. Palmer UCSD, Dept. of AMES 619-822-1037 (o) 760-599-9927 (h) rpalmer@ucsd.edu rpalmer@cts.com
Subject: Re: springs
Date: Tue, 7 Sep 1999 10:24:36 EDT
From: TIGEROOTES@aol.com
To: Tigers List
Armand,
I set my camber as you did, with tons of negative camber. My suspension was in the process of sagging and when I finally removed it for rebuilding and straightening it had well over 3 degrees of negative camber. I Vintage Raced my Tiger for six years, and toward the end, I found my car would not stop nearly as well as three others that were on track at the same time. Consequently, I had to begin braking earlier than the others. The temperatures across the width of the tread showed I was trying to stop the car with about half of the front tire surface area on the ground. It sure loved the turns, but fast lap times are determined by the time your foot is on the loud-pedal, not on the brake pedal. As you said, using negative camber is a cheap trick, and not a solution.
Jim Leach, Seattle
Subject: Re: Rubber Boots for Rod ends
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 09:51:56 -0400
From: Larry Paulick <larry.p@erols.com>
To: Tom Hall <modtiger@engravers.com>
CC: Tigers List
References: 1
Tom,
looked through my archives, and only came up with a CAT tech tip from Bill Caudle of Culver City, CA on 2/84, which said: "An excellent replacement for the dust cover on the lower ball-joint on you Alpine or Tiger is Volkswagen. Try PN 211 405 375; it's the ball-joint boot for from the Type II bus." I will continue to look, as I remember replacement boots also.
Larry
Subject: Re: springs
Date: Fri, 24 Sep 1999 18:13:53 -0700
From: Bob Palmer <rpalmer@ames.ucsd.edu>
To: CoolVT@aol.com, J&E@ontis.com, Tigers List
Steve, Mark, et Listers,
I should probably keep quiet on this topic, since my experience with the CAT springs is old - very old. However, here goes anyway. I believe the CAT springs are still nominally 330 lbs./in spring rate, which is stiffer than stock, so they need to be shorter in order to achieve the same ride height. I'm not sure if Mark installed his with our without the rubber isolator doughnut that goes on top, but it makes about 3/4" difference, depending how long after you installed them you measure it(they crush with time). When I had the CAT springs on my car they were installed without the doughnut and, yes, the car was VERY LOW in front. About fifteen years ago I got a set of 425 lbs./in springs from Coil Spring Specialties. They had supplied a lot of the cars in the S.F. Bay area (STOA) and were very familiar with the Tiger. I ordered them with 1" lower than stock ride height and they came out exactly right. I also think this spring rate is about perfect for performance driving. These springs are good quality and have not sagged one bit since I installed them. CSS has since moved to the Mid-West, but I think they supply springs to Dale. If I were asked to recommend springs by a friend, I'd tell him to think about what he's after in terms of ride and order them accordingly, either from Dale or directly from Coil Spring Specialties. I don't know what the going price is these days from CAT and other suppliers (ca. $100 ??), but this is a important decision that will significantly affect the performance of the car. I don't believe this is a case of "one size fits all" by any means. Some owners have 600 lbs./in springs, some still have stock. And BTW, you can't really compensate a bad choice of springs with a sway bar.
Just tossing another two cents in the pot,
Bob
At 07:16 PM 9/24/99 -0400, CoolVT@aol.com wrote:
>The CAT front springs I got 5-6 yrs. ago were too short. I believe they are
>supposed to be 12" unloaded length. The CAT's were 10 1/2". I'm pretty sure
>of these dimensions. Anyway, they were definitely 1 1/2" shorter than stock.
>My gas mileage has really picked up, though. The car always looks like it's
>running downhill.
> Mark L.
Robert L. Palmer UCSD, Dept. of AMES 619-822-1037 (o) 760-599-9927 (h) rpalmer@ucsd.edu rpalmer@cts.com
Subject: Re: Front suspension help
Date: Wed, 20 Oct 1999 09:26:57 -0700
From: Bob Palmer <rpalmer@ames.ucsd.edu>
To: "Ronak, TP (Timothy)" <Timothy.P.Ronak@akzo-nobel.com>, "'Tiger News Group List'" <Tigers List>
Tim,
I hope this helps some.
At 09:16 AM 10/20/99 -0500, Ronak, TP (Timothy) wrote:
>Listers....HELPP!!!
>I just started to rebuild the front suspension for my upcoming move to
>California as I will need to drive the car for a while as soon as I arrive.
>Last night I started disassembling everything and found some interesting
>things and would like some feedback. I started the project and now there is
>no turning back as I need to re-assemble the car in order to move it.
>
>Shocks: I have Konis but it seems that they collapse with only modest effort
>and then take significant effort to extend ....is this normal??
This kind a asymmetrical shock is best suited for Buicks and similar boulevard applications. What you want is something close to 50/50; i.e., equal resistance both ways. SS has Konis specially made for the Tiger. Others have used Carrera (?) (I believe) shocks and like them. But, this can wait until you have some time to spare as the Konis you have are probably useable.
>Upper Control Arm: I was undoing the bolts and did not leave the bolts in
>until all the bolts were out and I started to undo the last upper bolt and
>the retaining plate started to spin and ultimately turned into a big piece
>of spaghetti. Now I need to find this plate any suggestions where I can find
>one
... Sunbeam Specialties...any pieces out there. Know anyone with an Alpine parts car?? You could call Smitty at 619-233-7937 and have him FedEx you one. Or, you could take a hammer to the one you bent and try to straighten it. (Good therapy?)
>Lower Control Arm: I am installing new Bushings from S.S. and they look
>really nice! But a local Alpine guy indicated that if you install the lower
>fulcrum pin in backwards with the (pin swapping ends) you can improve Caster
>and make the car less twitchy at speed. Has anyone else done this out
>and what are the suggestions.
I had Dale install his REALLY BEEFY Global West lower fulcrum pins four years ago. This is what I would recommend you do - but not now I guess. Previously, I had installed the stock fulcrum pins backwards myself. Thought I was being really clever and did not know of anyone else doing the same. Note, it does say in the Shop Manual NOT to do this. The only consequence I can see is that the lower spring mount will be slightly shifted forward. Of course, it's important to make the change on both sides - which may be the reason for the statement in the Shop Manual. You can also get more caster by adding a small - maybe 1/8" shim between the cross member and the frame at the back two bolt locations. You'd like to have around 5 degrees of caster.
>Springs: I have stock ones and was thinking of going to the Sunbeam
>Specialties 335 lbs. per inch springs but I do not want to change ride height
>although I would like a little firmer ride.
Tim,
I think I know you well enough to believe you will be unhappy with springs this soft. Call Dale's Restorations (909-799-2099) and order a set of 400-450 lb./in springs. Get new isolator donuts from SS if Dale's doesn't have them.
>How many shims do you have in the front suspension as I would like to order >some to ensure that I have the full length shims.
Again, I disagree with the Shop Manual in this regard. A lot of us, probably most of us, use separate shims front and back so you can independently adjust caster and camber. Get yourself an assortment at the local front end shop. The number of shims you need, and how equal they are left and right side, will give you a pretty good idea what kind of shape the cross member is in. If you have too much camber, or it's very asymmetric, then there's a problem. Are you going to do the alignment yourself? You can do a pretty good job with a few simple tools. If the car pulls to the left or right, increase the caster on the side it pulls toward. Camber has only a slight effect on pulling left or right and you can set it pretty equal on both sides using a carpenter's level. Toe-in is probably the hardest to get right. Most front-end shops don't do a good job either. I use a straight piece of 8' electrical conduit to start with. Just hold it against the outside of each front wheel to get a rough idea of the alignment. Set the steering wheel square first, then adjust each wheel straight ahead. Once you have it looking about right, you need to do the "fine tune", which of course is impossible with the one full turn minimum adjustment of the Tiger's tie rod ends. I use a trammel set and mark the distance between marks on the tires at the rear, then role the car forward one-half rotation of the wheels and measure it again. But you can probably get it close enough to drive for awhile by just eyeballing it with the piece of conduit. When you get to warm and sunny So. Cal., just drive it down to Vista and we'll finish up the alignment together in my garage. Maybe you should call Theo and get his help! Now that you've buttered him up on the List, he should be a pushover. ;-)
Well, TTFN
>Please help if you can as I am pressed to get this done as soon as possible
>before the garage gets to 20 below or the movers show up.
>Thanks everyone!!!!
>Regards, >Tim Ronak
>B382000680
Robert L. Palmer UCSD, Dept. of AMES 619-822-1037 (o) 760-599-9927 (h) rpalmer@ucsd.edu rpalmer@cts.com
Subject: Re: Crossmember re-enforcement
Date: Mon, 01 Nov 1999 21:12:08 -0800
From: Bob Palmer <rpalmer@ames.ucsd.edu>
To: "Mike Sutter" <mjsutter@cts.com>, <Tigers List>
Mike,
In addition to Smitty, Tom Hall and Dale Akuszewski have their own methods of strengthening the crossmember. Several years ago I had Smitty do his thing to mine. In fact, my cross member may have been the first one he used his strengthening procedure on. Anyway, I inadvertently did a stress test on the crossmember by driving over a berm at about 60 mph taking an offramp off the 210 freeway in L.A. on my way to Tigers United in Bakersfield. The bump did enough damage to require a tow back to S.D. Not a fun way to start a weekend. All four Centerline wheels were bent somewhat, but repairable. The crossmember was seriously tweaked though, and I wound up replacing it with one that Dale did for me. It was interesting that the crossmember in the accident bent cleanly on each side along the outer edges of the aluminum pads. Neither the center section or the shock towers bent any discernible amount. I interpret this experience as indicating that Smitty's strengthening method works as well as is needed out to the mounting pads, and anything more, internal or external, is redundant. I expect there are some contrary opinions though. Another point to consider is that up until, I believe, the Series III Alpine, the shock tower was braced against the frame rail just behind the upper control arms. Shims are used between the frame rail and shock tower as well as to set camber/caster, so it is a bit more complicated arrangement. But bracing the shock tower at this point would seem to add strength outboard on the crossmember and may have prevented the collapse that occurred in my case. I had previously toyed with the idea of adding this type of support on my car, but decided not to because of other modifications that interfered. Regarding fulcrum pins, Dale had Global West make up upper and lower fulcrum pins for the Tiger/Alpine. I would recommend these to anyone considering replacing the original ones, which are notorious for braking on Tigers - especially while backing up and turning simultaneously - presumably because of the peculiar Ackerman geometry on the Tiger. I hope this anecdote and information is helpful Mike.
TTFN, Bob At 08:19 PM 11/1/99 -0800, Mike Sutter wrote:
>Listers,
>
>I have been in contact with a new member of the Tiger community and he has
>asked me about crossmember strengthening. The only method of strengthening
>that I have seen first hand is the "Smitty" method. This method includes
>the re-welding of the shock towers and rack mounts as well as the addition
>of (2) 2 inch wide formed steel plates to the forward surface of the
>crossmember adjacent to the mounting bolt holes. The plates cover an area
>about 10 inches along the forward edge of the lower half of the
>crossmember.
>
>I have heard of other methods that involve the opening of the crossmember
>and installation of stiffening ribs. If you could post some info on the
>list of different methods and their merits it would be appreciated.
>
>Any info on fulcrum pins would be of help also.
>
>MS > >R.I.P.G.M.
Subject: Front Suspension Parts Suppliers
D?y~gIP
b bjb:@k kq "oXZkf;'ٜ8>s P]6ΈcQ9IaH+1*H) }ŰK].*0]jneݟU^+[ׂWaU&X(֧J%Ĉ
^Trd6ש Q"|^*~#a9*ӱE1u}Hqڎ ]r5('Bs
S n떖-jX䩣^dTeYՅfĵDQ,9L=l
`ird @8 5ֹ0I LNB
ϳ͉ۛqT:H-<9W/-L
oGlYC4wo|f῭ӗ- 5KINBVb@
~jVT~\Hg)|QJF2GgPӛl M&VYUڇW~ggV_zޒxֳ_~}g~ Ƕ5`ouo_/~Zj{! `
`
!Dzh30$ 䱨L
VnR( $t FYh(餓$){ iL$[=5gdo-& b*@NK]8_<}5,4M7M=M
^2 /s 'YL
ȴ
i.l[#09X
xdhB1 DbxJL+)51$KE8 A"{p4 a Fcu1(֤B)Ek{te c]cSr It/L]4]ZkvKMOW
])./ѳiU
]oh
/{F8X%i-X'
[-rQNYn1K65*Eḁ9t]3iRz6[HݓىK'HhMBV
8 mG{I