Does anyone have some experience dealing with the unique MGC torsion bar set up?  When I used to align Mopars in the 70's, I really liked their torsion bar set up; a quick adjustment would put that ride height right back within specs.  I'm very curious to hear from MGC owners as to what their experience and comments would be.

I think that it would be neat to see someone built a replica/custom torsion bar set up on a "B".  Summit sells the key kit.

Jacques
I own a 68 mgc rdst and have owned 3 others in the past.  Yes the torsion bar is very ajustable,  just off the top of my head you could easily change fender over tire height by 2 or 3 inches.  Did you know that the mgc engine weighs like 700 lbs!  You could put a big block in a C and it would weigh less.

Way back when, before  the Mustang II front end became popular, the Dodge Aspen,Plymouth Volare torsion bar front end was getting popular with larger street rods and 56 Ford pickups. I wonder if it could be narrowed?

Jacques,

Presumably you are aware that not only is the C front suspension unique to the C but also the whole front of the shell is also different apart from the front wings/fenders.

Would be very difficult to incorporate the C suspension into the B.

Kevin.

re:  Would be very difficult to incorporate the C suspension into the B.


x2!  The floor pans would also need to be changed.

Kevin, yes I'm aware of it.  What I was referring to was designing your own torsion system with modification or fabrication of the lower control arms and installing a rear crossmember with the torsion bar keys and tensioners attached.  If I had my choice between the regular "B" and "C" set up for a V-8 conversion, I for sure would go with the "C".  They're too rare and expensive although.

Jim as you're probably aware, the Volare and Aspen had the torsion bars mounted across the front like a sway bar, I didn't care much for that set up, however, it became an easy transplant for the street rodders as not too many aftermarket IFS existed at the time.  Maybe it's only me, but, there's something mechanically attractive with the torsion set up.  BTW, there are a lot of cars and trucks that still uses the system.  The coil over suspension is more desirable to most but the torsion bar system is just as effective and adjustable IMHO.

Torsion bars worked great on my first car - a Valiant with 318 V8 - so I understand the attraction.

Easily adjustable for ride height, but I think a huge advantage of coilovers is that it's relatively cheap and easy to change springs to get a different wheel rate.  Lots of different coil spring suppliers out there!  

Once you have mounts for a coilover shock, you can usually choose between many grades and types of damper. (Adjustable valves, gas, etc.)

As for MGC... it obviously should have come with a small block Ford V8 from day one. The engine fits just about perfectly. The window of opportunity existed because the Sunbeam Tiger was going away, and Ford would surely have loved to sell engines to M.G. - they weren't really competitors.  (That's my theory anyhow.)  Installing a Ford V8 now just corrects one of history's great mistakes!

Jacques, The MGC front suspension is very easy to adjust for ride height to suit any change in weight  (hopefully less!) that might accompany an engine change. I had to let my suspension down over an inch when fitting a Ford V8 with alloy heads. This was a weight saving of about 150 lbs.  A T-5 is also about 50lbs less than a regular overdrive MG transmission from memory.
     One of the reasons why MG opted for  the change to torsion bars for the MGC was  extra hood clearance as the crossmember does not need to be so massive as when it supports the spring mounts like the MGB. This meant a taller, longer engine would clear the crossmember without interference.
     The underbody was re-enginered to provide stiffness for the rear torsion bar mounts which probably was a good thing in the roadster versions - especially if extra power was available.
   Unfortunately, it appears the MGC engine was more a matter of convenience for BMC at the time rather than an elegant solution to the demise of the Austin Healey 3000.  But 145 BHP from 650lbs generated a handicap that was hard to overcome. Still a nice touring car! Cheers, Bob.