Jump to content

't Kreng; a continuing story


Beans

Recommended Posts

At the moment I think there are three options left;

1. Try to live with it ... 
2. Fit stiffer springs and suffer on the not so smooth tarmac (in the surrounding countries) on which the car is regularly used (trembling)
3. Do some reading on the subject. First idea is compression struts 

Something to work on this winter ...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Adding these 'compression struts' would in my opinion, not make any significant change in the amount of brake dive in itself. It would give the freedom to possibly choose a geometry with more 'anti dive' since you're no longer restricted to using the orignal roll bar moutning position.  Read my post on the thead about how anti-dive spacers work from a month ago to see how front suspension geometry can create an anti-dive affect. One other thing to consider is how much the rear of the car lifts during braking since it adds to the dive angle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Shouldn't that be the other way round ... Due to the nose diving down the upward movement of the rear is more pronounced 
You'll always have weight transfer under braking offcourse

If installed properly, so with the compression strut pointing down to the wheel, there should be no dive. During braking the wheel wants to move back and up into  the chassis as the body comes down. If the angle of the arm is pointing down, the rearward force on the wheel will try to push the arm back, thus making it follow the downward arc. The weight of the body will resist this and you should have hardly any dive under braking.
Only the ARB 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sometimes I do get things rather backwards but I'm unsure of the relationship between the nose dive and rear lift you're thinking about. My thinking is along this line.  The amount of weight transfer is primarily determined by the center of gravity height and the wheel base. The pitch angle of the car under braking adds very little to the total weight transfer. So the total weight transfer for a given deceleration force (which on your car far exceeds the pathetic orignal braking ability) is essentially a constant. If the rear of the car has no anti-lift geometry (very likely) then the amount of weight being removed (transfered forward) will create an increase in rear ride height. Softer springs would create a greater change in height than stiffer ones for the same weight reduction. Adding some anti-lift geometry to the rear would be very interesting but I'm not sure if the changes would be practical. That's a rather long answer which may explain my idea on the rear contributing to dive angle.

Your explaination of how the compression struts would be installed is very significant. The downword angle from body to balljoint will definately create an anti-dive geometry. The percentage of anti-dive is determined by how much of an inclination angle is installed. Although 100% anti dive can create some strange problems and is fairly undesirable. It's a pretty interesting project.

The ARB could connect to drop links off of the strut tube if the bar end could be modified. I'm assuming the compression struts would replace the ARB location duties completely.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Theo

Neil Revington and I have been discussing decoupling the ARB, fitting front radius arms (like a Stag) and re-attaching the ARB to different connecting points so that it functions only as an ARB not and part of the sprining.  This is a standard mod he applys to racing TR7s.  The trick for my (road) car would be to build in some resiliance.

Have a word with him about it.

Chris

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A compression strut isn't better than an ordinary tie rod. It's only better suited for certain conditions. At least that is my first opnion after some reading on the subject 

Also it isn't an extra support. It replaces the tie rod function of the ARB. So the ARB has to be mounted to the suspension in such a way that it doesn't influence the tie rod(function) in any way. Otherwise the handling will become very unpredictable.

In my case I am looking for a car that's good on the (relatively) bad tarmac here in the region. So I need relative soft springs and long suspension travel. Very bad for anti dive under braking.
Another advantage of the compression strut is when you hit a pothole at speed the wheel won't move as much into the body/backwards as an ordinary tie rod because the weight of the body counters this (for the same reason as the anti brake dive, if the strut is properly mounted that is. Got the idea in the first place from some mk1 (rallye) escorts.

For an "ordinary" roadcar or a trackcar (with much stiffer springs) tie rods are probably a better option

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 years later...

Sorry, had to dig out one of the cars taking part in this years "Nachtrit" from deepest darkest Belgium yesterday ...
As it's dark as I get home from work this time of year you'll have to wait at least til next weekend for some piccies from the inside ...

Some general piccies which give an impression how they are fitted ...

Caliper with the (radial) mounting holes visible...



Mounting bracket with bolts ...



Mounted caliper with mounting bolts to the right ...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks Theo. Don't go to a special effort to photo the inside this weekend - but next time you have T'Kreng on the hoist I would be grateful if you snap a couple.

I had never seen radially mounted calipers fitted and am curious about the mounting braket used. I assume this is fixed using the original caliper fixings to the strut. I don't suppose you took any measurements of the bracket before fixing?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quoted from omichaelshar
... Don't go to a special effort to photo the inside this weekend - but next time you have T'Kreng on the hoist I would be grateful if you snap a couple.

It's still on axle stands with the wheels of do that's not much of a problem 🤔

Quoted from omichaelshar
... I assume this is fixed using the original caliper fixings to the strut ...  

Correct

Quoted from omichaelshar
...I don't suppose you took any measurements of the bracket before fixing?

Euhh ... aslo correct   I'll get a tape measurement in the piccies for comparison.
Will try to measure the most important dim's

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quoted from omichaelshar
... Any data would be very much appreciated ...

Viewed from above...



Bracket is 16mm wide where it is mounted to the strut;
At the back it's 21.5mm wide;
The mounting holes for the caliper are centered at the back;
Distance from face of hub to heartline of disc is 65mm;
Discs are 28mm thick

Viewed from the inside ...



Total height of bracket is 188mm;
Mounting holes are 148mm apart;

No decent measurements of the distance between mounting bolts and rear of bracket.
This also depends on the disc diameter, mine are
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks Theo for the nice pics and data.

I must have missed a thread regarding the need to spacers. I take it these are being fitted between the disk hat and hub? I might be dumb today as I can't visualise how this helps tyre clearance. Wont they move the hub face more outboard, thus bringing them closer to the wheel arch? Or is it that more clearance is needed inboard for some reason?

Owen

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...