leaf spring

[system6]

hi
   Just a quick question......i own a mk3 gt6  :)(late model non-rotoflex ),...is the bad road holding associated with the mk 1  the same as the mk3 non rotoflex , the answer is proberbly no but i would like someone to confirm it .

                                       Thanks

[Clive]

Nope, the clever update to the late spring made a huge difference.

[DougBGT6]

I've owned a late non-rotoflex model since 1978. All the reviews over the years say the same, barely detectable difference from the rotoflex model. I have heard of people converting non-rotoflex to rotoflex but not many, if it was an issue we'd all be doing it! The only puzzle is why didn't they do it like this in the first place.

[mikeyb]

Best possible setup in my opinion. I've fitted a late swing spring and anti roll bar to my Mk1, in effect creating the same set up.

ROtoflex works well but has the disadvantage of greater unsprung weight and expensive driveshaft couplings (do-nuts), that do not last!

[John Bonnett]

9077 wrote:

I've owned a late non-rotoflex model since 1978. All the reviews over the years say the same, barely detectable difference from the rotoflex model. I have heard of people converting non-rotoflex to rotoflex but not many, if it was an issue we'd all be doing it! The only puzzle is why didn't they do it like this in the first place.

My new car will be Rotoflex and the GT6 I have just sold swing spring. People do say that there is no detectable difference between the two systems but the fact that there is hardly any camber change on the Rotoflex and a lot on the swingspring must surely make the Rotoflex superior for country lane driving.

[Nick Jones]

Late, long-shaft, swing spring setup is as good as the swing axle gets and a huge improvement on the originals. Roto cars feel more stable on bumpy, cambered surfaces due to less camber and track change.

It's more unusual for the rotoflex cars to shed rear wheels too......

Nick

[Clive]

I must say my last spitfire was a swingspring car, and handled pretty well. However, the one I am building (slowly) is a rotoflex one with nicks excellent CV conversion (Nick, disposing of the bearing shimming issue is a fantastic step forward over the original setup, worth it for that alone!). And people who know me can be assured I would not spend out on the conversion if it didn't offer value.....
However, I would happily have  a swingspring car. I have had several over the years, one (2.5 vitesse) as an everyday car for a dozen years or so.

[John Bonnett]

Nick_Jones wrote:

Late, long-shaft, swing spring setup is as good as the swing axle gets and a huge improvement on the originals. Roto cars feel more stable on bumpy, cambered surfaces due to less camber and track change.

It's more unusual for the rotoflex cars to shed rear wheels too......

Nick

Yes that's what I thought Nick and good to have it confirmed.

Perhaps my GT6 wasn't a good example because of the standard bushes and dampers but a lot of concentration and input was needed to drive briskly on the roads up on Skye. The rear suspension certainly felt as if it was doing a bit of steering on its own.

My new car will not be directly comparable because I'm using Gaz adjustables, polybushed suspension and a lighter engine but it would be interesting to do a back to back comparison with two similar cars with just the rear suspension different..