leaf springs vs 4 link

[classic conversions]

Good question. springs or 4 link.
Just for a cruiser, down the hwy with the top down, speed limit etc etc.
The more modern set up for the B is well worth it due to the ride quality, which is what you want driving a cruiser.

So..what you are asking is which system is better for the street cruiser (as you called mention) Then the 4 link is the ticket.
The 4 link offers more than just a good ride quality, it offers adjustments  of ride hight, ride comfort (easy spring change) pinion angle adjustment, it locates the axle, plus other.

If fabricating your own keep in mind the geometry to avoid axle bind. It is not just brackets and links.
It will fit a 9", 8", 7.5 GM or Ford and the stock MG rear axle.

[pspeaks]

Thanks Bill, I sometimes get ahead of myself and don't think things through.  What you say about the geometry being right is true and the adjustability of your 4-link is great.  We called our first T-Bucket "The Mule" because we did and re-did almost everything on it a number of times and as a result the cost and time spent on later cars was more manageable, but doing it the first time was a pain and expensive.  If I tried to do a four link myself from scratch it would be the same thing all over again.  We are building 2 trikes from scratch now and what should have taken 6 weeks has run into 6 months and they still aren't ready to roll on their own.  As for me, the leaf springs on my car are adequate for now but I have no illusions that it's better than a 4-ling because it isn't.  Doing one myself is still a sexy idea but you have a great kit and sometime in the future I'll be a customer.


"P"

[classic conversions]

Paul, I know what you mean. I have been working on the front end suspension for 2 1/2 years, I finally got where I think it will give the best. Once completed then is testing and perhaps some minor changes.

I lost count of how many cross members I build. Build one from plates to get the dimensions to build a jig and one form the jig.
I know, this is the hard way to go about it, but it is also a good way to get everything to work properly when manufacture.

It is easier to build a one off than building one for production.

[flitner]

Paul,
What kind of trikes are you building???

[BlownMGB-V8]

No doubt about that Bill, and you do good work. What's bad is a major upgrade in the middle of development. That'll easily add a year or more to the release date of a big project like a front end or my IRS. But, considering there have been no advance orders, what does it really matter?

JB

[classic conversions]

Yes, you know what I mean, and I have not tested the unit. Static measurements check out ok thus far.

I am anxious to see your new IRS Jim.

[pspeaks]

I agree with Jim, you do excellent work Bill.  As you well know, during mockup you have to continually keep in mind, engineering and the end unit production cost and what a customer can pay for the product.  Our original idea was to produce turnkey cars, but the liability insurance was a killer, so we went into the Kit car world.  We sold parts for about three years but the economy tanked and the toy market dried up.  A couple of government contracts came along and that was the end of our little adventure.  The owner's son is building a Porches Speedster Kit but it's just for him and we, as a company, are keeping hands off.  John, the owner came across what is called a Swedish Trike on the internet, contacted the builder and purchased plans.  It uses a VW motor turned around backwards in the normal location and uses two transmission cases connected together; needless to say the transmissions are rather modified to keep from having one forward gear and four reverses.  It's a little weird but works.  I'll see if he will let me post a picture.

I'm not a computer guy, but try this site.   http://hem.passagen.se/trike/engelsk/ramareng.htm

"P"

[DiDueColpi]

Paul,

Those trikes are pretty cool!
Less haywire trans choices might be the Porsche 924/944 setup with a shortened drive shaft.
Or my favorite, the Alfa trans axle. Comes with 5 speeds an integral clutch and disc brakes. Just hook a driveshaft to the front of it and away you go.

Cheers
Fred

[flitner]

That is an interesting setup versus conventional. As Fred said the Porsche 914? 944, box would be ideal also look into the amatuer Grand prix style (F1) cars that use the Pinto style setup and the engine is transversed,,,,OOH how about Subaru trans.
I'm at work right now but when I get home I'll post a pic of mine.

Sorry for hijacking the thread but "Trikes" Hit a nerve just as does MG and Beer!! Till Then,
John

[jim]

here is a pretty easey 4 link on a 59 sprite

jim

[undertowrocks]

Thanks for all the posts and ideas concerning my question about leafs vs 4 link. I think I will go with the leafs with the idea of using pieces off the old leafs to help eliminate bind up. I have also purchased a set of traction bars I will use to aid in the as well. Just finished the body work on my MA, so I will be starting on the suspension next. I'll keep the forum posted. I tried to attach a photo but it said the file was too large. Any ideas, its just a simple digital camera photo.

[mgb260]

Has to be Jpeg and limited to size.

[undertowrocks]

Ths is my MGA just before xmas. Done the bodywork now, just have to spray the 2 stage primer.

[crashbash]

Jim Begor,  what are the coilovers from?  Has this set up been thrashed hard?  Doesn't look like it's tied down in enough places, what do I know though   Currently with narrowed limited slip gm with disk brakes in conventional mgb rear suspension hasn't been on the road yet.  I was going to add panhard, more leafs, sway bar.  This may not be the way to go it seems.

[jim]

the coil overs are QA1's I started with the 59 sprite rear it did not hold the 3400 with a five speed rod ends and swedge tubes
the tubes were not heavy enough went to dom tube with weld ends there is a 1/4" plate at the bulk heads

[jim]

after changing the tubes and going to a 10 bolt limited slip with 3.42 it works out very well

[jim]

It is a satchell 4 link it is working very well played pretty hard after going to the 10 bolt no problems do a search on satchell 4 link
there is a lot of info on it some talk about noise with the rod ends  but I dont get any road noise or clunking

jim

[classic conversions]

Any two angle links is a Satchell system.
 To much angle on the links will transfer the loading to the side of the tubing.
Tubing is not design to take side loads. Square tubing is.
Weakest point on a welded rod link is the weld due to the steep angle of the link.

The angle in which the tubes ares located is critical. To much angle will allowed the axle to move sideways due to flex of the tubing.

The true original of Mr. Satchell system, had the links angle starting point form the center of the axle and to the outside.
This was done for a better Roll Center for Racing ONLY.

[jim]

Bill from what I see of your work on line I respect your opinion that tube that broke was junk I miked where the threads were after
that broke  I had very few thousands of an " after the trreads were cut I have 1" dom tube now .95 wall and no problems the car on the street handles very well I am very happy with it

jim

[classic conversions]

I am sure it works great Jim. I was not been a critic.

[socorob]

Actually the satchell link has all the tie in points at the furthest point out (closest to the tires) on the axle. The upper rods run pretty much straight in plan view and the lower rods angle to the center of the car at a 45 degree angle. A good discussion of it is here as mounted on a jaguar. http://corner-carvers.com/forums/showthread.php?t=18020&page=1&pp=40     its basically an upside down triangulated 4 link. It wont be an easy weekend swap out like a pre made bolt in kit though, thats for sure.

[socorob]

Jim,
What lengths are your lower and upper links?

[jim]

The bottom rodend to rodend center 18"1/4"  top 12"1/2"