![]() |
droplinks on standard SWB suspension - Printable Version +- Austinsevenfriends (https://www.austinsevenfriends.co.uk/forum) +-- Forum: Austin Seven Friends Forum (https://www.austinsevenfriends.co.uk/forum/forumdisplay.php?fid=1) +--- Forum: Forum chat... (https://www.austinsevenfriends.co.uk/forum/forumdisplay.php?fid=14) +--- Thread: droplinks on standard SWB suspension (/showthread.php?tid=1163) |
droplinks on standard SWB suspension - JonE - 06-05-2018 Is there any SWB suspension advantage in: 1. adding longer rear alloy links? (than the standard shortest ones) 2. removing one of the front droplinks to enable a direct axle connection? i.e. for modern road driving I only ask as these things are done for sports, and I'm not sure if the advantages would be the same. thanks JonE RE: droplinks on standard SWB suspension - stuartu - 06-05-2018 Jon, I assume you are referring to the shock absorber links front and rear. IMHO, 1. Probably not unless the shock absorber arm is going to hit something on full bump. 2. I consider some form of front axle location desirable and that would be one way to do it, so yes. It's a bit crude but I admit to having done the same myself for half a century. Regards, Stuart RE: droplinks on standard SWB suspension - Robert Leigh - 06-05-2018 (06-05-2018, 02:13 PM)JonE Wrote: Is there any SWB suspension advantage in: The long links are for 'low frame' cars, Rubies and derivatives. I think they would be a disadvantage on the earlier high frame cars, because the geometry would give slightly less angular travel on the shock absorber than the standard link. I do run my Chummy with a solid (rubber bushed) connection to the axle on one side. Robert Leigh RE: droplinks on standard SWB suspension - JonE - 06-05-2018 thanks both. I'll proceed with front (saves a few grammes too!) and discard thoughts on back. |