MK1 anti roll bar conversion

[Spider]

What is the consensus of opinion upgrading a MK1 by fitting a anti roll bar? Is it worth the cost and effort for the improvement in handling?

[thescrapman]

I would ask the question, is it an upgrade?

lots of people say it is, both of mine are still without, and I have driven with and without. Didn't think much difference.

[Spider]

 

Quoted from thescrapman-

I would ask the question, is it an upgrade?

lots of people say it is, both of mine are still without, and I have driven with and without. Didn't think much difference.

As it will be a road car only I think I shall go without if there is little or no improvement. I was only going to consider fitting one if it was a large improvement. Plus less maintenance required replacing drop links and mounting bushes, has to be a bonus.

[TedTaylor]

On AFH I only ever used a slightly uprated CW front strut setup.

It was only for fast road use and I never felt the need to use an ARB, and would probably have tried a further uprating of the spring/shocker set up before I considered going down that route.

MUT

[Spider]

I did wonder if it was a major improvement or not as I had occasion to remove the ARB from a GT6 with stiffer springs and found the ride more compliant on what laughably pass as roads we have to drive on.

 I have some unknown springs on the front at the moment as I had to replace a broken spring and had some springs in my stock of parts, I was told they were stag springs but I'm not so sure, 2" longer than the saloon springs. I will be replacing with some CW progressive springs and some lower rears with standard shocks soon as I think the original rear springs may follow the front springs after such little use in 45 years, that and the farm track I live at the end of may be too much for the springs to put up with.

So no ARB and some lower progressive springs on the front and stiffer 1" lower rear springs and standard shocks. May upgrade shocks at a later date when mine become tired.

 

 

[nang]

What is often not known, when the S was fitted with arb's as standard  it was fitted with softer springs. I found this out when I bought one with a sick body years ago. Been in an accident  and one front strut had been replaced with a standard one actually marked as "Triumph 2500"

It handled strangely. I fitted the arb to my 2500. I checked part numbers and found arb and non arb spring numbers different.

Found a couple of S springs. ARB is still on the car and in my opinion makes a big difference in handling.

Just my thoughts.

Tony.

[Richard B]

I prefer the anti-rollbar, a car without one can lean quite alarmingly when driven at speed into a fast bend.

Police cars and Estates got this before the S came out, not sure of the date, my 1970 PI did not have it but my 1973 PI did.

I believe some of MkI PI Estates were rolled in the past. It was suggested this was because of the higher CofG due to the lead  & glass, although the narrower track at the back would also contribute.

[Nick Jones]

I tried (and liked) the CW dual rate springs on my PI but the addition of an ARB was definitely a further improvement.  Mk2 but not so different really.

Nick

[Slimboyfat]

Go with much stiffer springs before fitting a front anti roll bar. The springs on all models (apart from the rear's on early MKII estates) are far to soft.  

All models tend to understeer without roll bar, fitting one to an otherwise standard car only promotes increased understear. 

 

[Spider]

I think some lower stiffer springs will be adequate for the type of driving I am likely to be doing, more swift road car as opposed to fast road car, as I may yet have to fit an auto box at sometime in the future.

 I can always fit an ARB if required later. Better off putting the money into the GT6.